Why Nokia should enter the 3D Printer Business

I never worked at Nokia but I did work for them on a number of Consumer Data and Consumer Experience projects as Client Partner for a Berlin based mobile agency. That's the time where I saw first hand, back in 2009, how stubbornly blind they were to what was coming their way. I was one of their first clients back in the 90's when I got my first Nokia 1011 and always loved their phones. I had one till 2010 or so, the last one being the E71. Then came the iPhone, also for me, followed by the Android Tsunami and the rest is history. The latest Lumia models are nice, very nice indeed but I find it hard to believe that they can survive on a "Me has smart phones too". Although nice and refreshing Windows Phone is simply not the disruptive change and jump forward we'd all love to see and have as consumers.

So where should they go from here? My suggestion: they should enter the 3D Printer Business. Here's why.

From past to present

Look up Nokia and on Wikipedia you learn that this company started out in the wood pulp business and then went into the electricity generation business near Tampere in Finland. It added Rubber to its portfolio and started marketing rubber boots under the Nokia Brand Name. It then evolved into a conglomerate of businesses that included over a period of decades, telegraph and telephone cables, bicycles, robots, television, military communication equipment, gas masks and chemicals. The first step towards telecommunications was made in the 70's when they produced a digital switch for telephone exchanges which became the workhorse of the telco industry.

Through its military engineering experience Nokia started experimenting with wireless telephony in the 70's as well and they were directly involved in creating the first communication standards for wireless telephony. Its first GSM phone came out in 1989 and was delivered to Finish telco operator Radiolinja. From there, in less than a decade Nokia quickly dominated the mobile phones business with Motorola and Ericsson in its slipstream.

What does the history of Nokia teach us? Well, they have a lot of experience in engineering, designing and building electronic hardware and they have two decades of programming software for this hardware under their belt. But all of this experience is now at a critical cross road where they risk loosing lots of this heritage if their smartphone business strategy doesn't deliver.


What about 3D printers?

If you believe the hype, 3D printers are going to change the way we live and do business in under two decades from now.
For those who don't know here's why 3D printers are so important:

• They will change the way we produce an increasing number of products dramatically. From prosthetics, via glasses, household items and jewels all the way to the scandal inducing possibility of guns and rifles. 
• This new way of producing one off and personalized goods can potentially make a chunk of what's mass produced today redundant. It will open the door to a new type of retail commerce, i.e. specialized 3D printer stores, that are simply there to turn digital ideas into tangible objects. I'm sure you will see specialized stores springing up because not all printers can deliver all objects. You could metaphorically consider 3D printers as the last missing output module of the internet.
• Although the technology is still in a very early stage and end-results are not always satisfactory, its just a matter of time till we will buy a 3D printer for at home or in the garage and start using it to enhance our daily lives. 

3D printing today is in its infancy. You can buy a 3D printer today for a price that would buy you a sophisticated fridge or washing machine but defining 3D objects, using graphical software, is not an easy task. Of course one can find 3D printer forums and blogs by the dozen and they most will offer  some form of file sharing. Experimentation is still part of the process though but as said before, the promise of being able to print personal objects for a wide variety of applications is getting the attention of an increasing number of consumers, start-ups and businesses. 

So why should Nokia go into the 3D printer business?

Its my strong believe that if any company in the world is capable of entering this space and turning it into a strong new business its Nokia. As I pointed out before they have long standing history in hardware AND software manufacturing. My guess is also that they have access to a well trained workforce and an extensive line up of production partners around the globe. All that's needed is a nod from Stephen Elop and the creation of a 3D printer task force with a R&D budget attached. My  guess is that they'll be able to churn out a 3D printer with an easy to use interface and software within a year. They should not forget to leverage their experience in creating eco-systems. Anyone remembers Ovi or MyNokia? If they create an eco-system around these 3D printers using the same principles as Apple once did with Music and Movies via iTunes, they're in for a healthy future.

So, who introduces me to Mr. Elop so I can pitch the idea? :-)

Thanks for reading my Blog.

Matt

For further reading:
http://3dprintingindustry.com

If you want one yourself check Cubify

Message to Nokia: Stop Featurism - Start Experience Branding

The iPhone5 vs. Lumia 920 infographs keep popping up on the web and more specifically on Facebook. Whether directly driven by Nokia or not, the comparison of the Camera quality, the touchscreen sensitivity or the wireless charge feature, show that Nokia and its community are still thinking that more features mean a better product, a better user experience and ultimately Brand loyalty. But to beat the iPhone at its game there's more at stake than a choice of device colors.

Its no news to most of my blog readers that the iPhone5 beats the Lumia on all accounts is its eco-system. If you set-up your iTunes account properly in combination with Apple's cloud service, migrating from any iPhone to the iPhone5 is fairly painless, although some major 'fxxx-ups' have been reported.

Yes, we know by now that the new Apple Maps is not what it should be, not by far. With Apple openly apologizing and suggesting the use of other Map apps I'm not sure whether this is the first of more blunders to come in the absence of Steve Jobs or just a temporary bump on the roadmap (pun intended).  This interesting article sheds some light on Apple's changes under Tim Cook.

Whatever it is, none of these Apple problems will stop them from having the better integrated user-experience with music, apps and media available over one coherently designed platform.

Lumia in yellow anybody?

With the Lumia 920 Nokia will have a device on offer with a number of sleek features (and colors!) but there's not much of a consistent eco-system coming with it, at least not at first. So for now the Lumia 920 is a device, heavily leaning on a Windows Brand feature, its UI and less on Nokia's Brand values which is, as far as I can remember, about 'Connecting People'.

This won't change much when Windows 8 is rolled out and Microsoft, who all of sudden discovered User-Oriented Design and seems to be winning back some of its mojo, gets its eco-system act together. Because the question remains, where does it leave Nokia as a Brand in this equation? Their focus on hardware and features, instead of offering a compelling experience in line with the Brand values, is not the right way forward. When it doesn't integrate deeply in a user's life, it will not be a sustainable offering against the competition.

Microsoft forced more or less all Hotmail users to migrate to an Outlook branded interface. This is, according to some internal sources at Microsoft, one of the steps towards a thorough harmonization of its consumer brands. Only if that happens any time soon will Nokia stand a chance luring some users towards their smartphone products, specifically among those who are currently on BlackBerry for professional reasons. Why? Well because a strong and streamlined eco-system will help convincing potential users to make the switch. The question here from a Branding perspective is still how Nokia will remain visible in an otherwise Microsoft branded eco-system. But maybe it would be good if they can survive by selling more hardware in the first place.

I am currently keeping a close eye on how the IT-community is picking up Windows 8 and what the speed of migration here is. Once small, medium and large companies have adopted Windows 8, switching the workforce to Windows Phone mobile devices will make sense. With Apple remaining weak in the mail and calendar applications space, there's a real chance for the Nokia-Windows tandem to gain serious traction at the expense of BlackBerry and Android and ultimately, also at the expense of Apple if they keep committing Map likes gaffes.

Focus on smart not on phones
Strategically it is actually refreshing to see how Nokia starts playing the role of the underdog. They finally seem to understand that being small and agile has an advantage. When also  having the immense pressure of potential failure in the next few years on their shoulders, smarter thinking starts popping up. 

I would sincerely welcome Nokia as a player that drives Windows 8 devices forward. They have to start thinking eco-systems though and the opportunity could be in the small and medium sized business space on the one hand. On the other side I think that there's an opportunity in creating solutions that would integrate with user's daily lives. With the upcoming surge in connected household appliances Nokia could think of solutions that embed their devices through a clever eco-system, e.g. a dedicate platform, in their daily activities. When you think about their credo 'Connecting People' than this concept would make total sense.

Why don't they focus on a phone that takes their own Maps experience to the next level. Much like Apple made iTunes indispensable for iPhone, Nokia Maps could integrate so well with the Lumia devices that you want to use it since it improves your life for particular use-cases you tremendously. Out of the box thinking, or really getting rid of the whole box altogether is required here. But whether Nokia's leadership is in the right place to got there? 

So far there's little sign of Nokia going in that direction. In a recent interview with cnet Stephen Elop says even 'We'll spend to break through', the question remains: spending it on what? In the interview it is clear that one more time they focus on hardware. But its like selling Ferrari's in Africa. There's no infrastructure there to enjoy such a car to its full potential. 

Maybe there's a small guerrilla group somewhere in Nokia House driving this change, completely under the corporate radar. That this can result in great changes is what we've seen at Audi with the Quattro concept. If not then all the spending in the world is not going to connect Nokia to reality and it will remain the burning platform as described by Stephen Elop in his first internal memo he sent at the start of his tenure as CEO.

Nokia is on my radar-screen in any event.

MV

Why Sony should have invented the iWatch

It is easy to criticize companies in trouble. My gripe with Sony as much as with Nokia is that they should have seen the changes in their markets coming 5 years ago. They should have launched new products, services or even businesses by today or should have acquired promising start-ups by now.
None of that happened and we could  contemplate forever about why not. So while it is easy to see this in hindsight, the question remains of course; what should they have done different? Upon  seeing yet another I'm Watch ad or an E-Paper Watch ad, the latest über-succes story at Kickstarter, I realized THIS is what Sony could or should have done. And in fact [update!] they just did announce one.


Sony Smartwatch - the one to watch?

Most consumers age 30 and over will remember Sony for their Walkman. I also remember them from back in the days as makers of super cool video and recording studio hardware. But some time after 2000 Sony started to loose its cool. And recently it all went from bad to worse. 

For too long Sony went on producing hardware but they forgot to develop a meaningful ecosystem. It also forgot to develop products that are cool. Where before Sony sold ultra-expensive halo hardware, much like Audi has the A8 or R8, today they have little to brag about.

When they did start to develop content for their hardware, like the Sony Entertainment Network, the rest of the market was already a step ahead. Its fine to build television or to sell hifi equipment but what if the content is not more and more integrated with a larger digital infrastructure? Where is the Bluetooth connection on a Sony TV e.g. How can I easily integrate that huge screen into my owned & acquired content collection? How can I get access to searchable content on the web. Where can I access my content in the cloud? Can I stream my music over Wifi or Bluetooth using other equipment, preferably from Sony if that is my preferred supplier?

Today it is absolutely important to not only sell hardware but to sell an infrastructure where the hardware is first and foremost the start of a customer relationship. But the hardware should also be a tool that derives its relevance from what it does NOT do, i.e. it is not a collection of features but a logical unit that gains its meaning in my life through integration. It should have a clearly reduced but relevant set of features that enable this integration, nothing more and nothing less.

And then there is I'm Watch. In fact in itself I'm Watch is nothing more than a different way of using existing content, transmitted over Bluetooth. Apart from a clock it can't do much, yet it comes alive as soon as its hooked up to a smartphone or computer. Now imagine I'm Watch with a Sony logo on it. Imagine what they can develop to bring that watch to live, using their own available content.

So there it is Sony; I'm Watch could have been your next Walkman. This is what consumer ask from electronics today. Cross device content streams, cloud based content solutions. It is actually not so important whether it is the cloud, a smartphone, or computer based, it doesn't really matter. It is again more about how the end-user has seamless access to owned, acquired or searchable content at any given time. For Sony this should go from integration of television use with home computers and tablets, with the home based printer, with a cloud based storage. 

UPDATE

Just days after this article was published here first Sony did release a Bluetooth watch under the completely un-inspiring and 'missed a major opportunity to define a category' name Sony Smartwatch. According to the reviews there is not so much that is very Smart about it. In fact from the reviews you get the feeling that some haphazardly put together team rushed the thing to market, forgetting in the process what it takes to build a great experience.


The I'm Watch offers, at least on ehrm 'paper' the right kind of integration and serves as an agile extension of your smartphone or computer. I just hope it will serve as a wake-up call for big corporates and their workforce. We'll wait and see but if the Smartwatch is Sony's future then it I'd challenge them to get smarter still.

 Sony Smartwatch review @pocket-lint

i’m Watch, the first real smartwatch in the world

 

 I'm watch home page

Update:

Sony filing a Patent for wireless charging. Curious to see what they will do with it in a few months from now.