RIM are too busy trying to be Apple:
[External Link]
It fits though, both companies are dedicated to hampering their customers' use of the technology in their pocket with proprietary standards and electronic locks, as well as being sycophant rainmakers for their chosen service providers. It's the North American way, after all.
This is the antithesis of Nokia's smartphones, which operate "free range" without artificial restrictions or crash-prone proprietary networks. (Disclaimer: My Nokia is better than your Blackberry)
If you want to know why the Finns are so far ahead of us in communications, you can look to RIM, Rogers, and Bell, three huge rusty anchors on our mobile communications ship.
There is one similarity in communications though, both countries keep secret internet blacklists which are used by our service providers with no public disclosure of what's being filtered:
[External Link]
"It fits though, both companies are dedicated to hampering their customers' use of the technology in their pocket with proprietary standards and electronic locks,"
What they are really doing is trying to maximize value for their shareholders - which they are obligated to do. It's up to competitors to keep them in check. Apple found that out the hard way 20 years ago when they refused to license their operating system.
The Finns are remarkable but they are also very different from modern Canadians. They are a small, homogeneous country with a strong Lutheran work ethic that emphasizes hard work and thrift.
There is a word that Finns use to define themselves -- it is "sisu," which means strength of will or guts. This kind of culture will take you a long way.
The Finns are indeed remarkable, decent and very successful, but they do have an Achilles heel. RIM should propose a joint venture with Nokia and provide an open bar at all meetings. It will all be ours very soon thereafter.
Posted at 2008-04-02 09:47:08 [PermaLink]John B,
"What they are really doing is trying to maximize value for their shareholders - which they are obligated to do. It's up to competitors to keep them in check."
It's more up to the customer to understand what they're buying as the idea of competition in the Canadian mobile data market is laughable.
In RIM's case, Canadian companies have bought into the Blackberry and are paying too much for a simple service, which in turn diminishes their own share equity. This ignorance in understanding what they're paying for is what is behind the ridiculous mobile data prices in Canada.
A Finnish business would laugh if presented with a Canadian rate plan for mobile email. A Canadian business will find that it has no choice but to pay the ransom since our mobile providers have no interest in charging a market rate for the data services that underly the "magical" Blackberry system.
To give you an idea of how bad this is, Rogers/Fido charges 5c/kb for actual internet access (not WAP). That means that if I load Damian's page on my cell phone, it would cost me $16 on my phone bill for the ~3 seconds of 3G network activity. My only option to get a decent price is to buy a PC card plan which would run me a minimum of $65/month for 1 gigabyte of data.
In Finland I could get a truly unlimited, if slightly slower (maybe 8 seconds for Damian's full page), 3G data connection for 10 Euros. That's $15/month for each employee to have unlimited email and full internet application access. In Canada, that $15 will buy your employee about 1.5 megabytes which can be used only for email.
There are no competitors in the Canadian GSM phone market. Bell and Telus have slightly better plans but you have to buy a locked phone that can not be used on any other network in the world, another unnecessary business cost (and another North American specialty).
So hurry for shareholders at RIM and Rogers, now what about the across the board detriment to every Canadian company that relies on mobile data? It's price gouging on the backs of ignorant, or at least financially uninterested, consumers.
Dara:
Re: "It's more up to the customer to understand what they're buying as the idea of competition in the Canadian mobile data market is laughable."
I was referring to Apple and RIM in general. The problem with the wireless market in Canada is lack of competition in a government regulated market. I just haven't any pressing need for mobile data so I'm not familiar with the rates. I've been sufficiently pissed at the three wireless companies that I switched to Virgin Mobile a year ago (after number portability). Yes, I know it's a joint venture with Bell but I get along quite nicely without paying the dreaded network access charge and free voice mail /call display.
Leaving aside the curious difficulty some people have differentiating between mobile device manufacturers and mobile network providers, the article left out another big benefit of Finlandization - more top-notch F1 and WRC drivers!
Posted at 2008-04-02 11:24:25 [PermaLink]John B,
I was specifically talking about RIM who have gone along for the ride with the Canadian service providers and are themselves a service provider as they are responsible for the Blackberry delivery system which is in turn accessed through the mobile carriers systems according to the agreement between RIM and the carriers.
Rogers, Bell, and Telus have allowed RIM to "brand" mobile communications in Canada as being their second rate system. It is that relationship, more than government interference, which has caused Canada to fall behind countries such as Rwanda (!) in mobile data access.
Steve Sailer:
"Finland's Secret:
The Washington Post has sent two reporters to Finland for several weeks to find out why Finland has "the world's best educational system, produces such talented musicians and architects, and has more cell phones per capita than Japan and America." They are writing a blog about their findings.
Sitting here in my pajamas in America, I could have saved the Washington Post all the expense. The most important reason why Finland is so Finlandy is because it is full of Finns.
According to the CIA World Factbook, the population of Finland is 93.4% Finnish. The big minority group at 5.7% is ... Swedes. Then comes Russians at 0.4%, and Estonians at 0.2%. Then there are the Sami (Laplanders) at 0.1%, and from what little I've heard about these semi-Asiatic reindeer herders, they sound OK to me. Roma (Gypsies) make up 0.2%, but lots of European countries have even more.
The number of Muslims in Finland was estimated at 15,000-20,000 as of 1999, which is a fraction of one percent, far less than in most other Western European countries.
The possibility that Finland is so Finlandy precisely because it maintains its borders and thus can evolve a governmental and social system well-suited to a population that is 99% Scandinavian can only be hinted at in the American press."
Like other island nations - yes, finland is not physically an island but it is a cultural one - the homogeneity of the people allows it to become more agile and independent. Same goes for singapore, Iceland, Japan, New Zealand and Ireland. However, for every successful island culture there are failed ones: Haiti, Jamaica, Newfoundland.
Posted at 2008-04-02 15:56:54 [PermaLink]