Nokia changes its tune on touchscreens. Entirely.

In a complete reversal of its "not enthusiastic" stance on touchscreens voiced last week by Antti Vasara, the company's General Manager of Mobile Devices, Nokia has come out in favor of that completely unproven little technology. "Optical sensors and touch will be the next big things," said Nokia Chief Technology Officer Tero Ojanpera today, in the leadup to the CommunicAsia telecom fair. "I believe there will be a lot of innovation around these." Apparently he didn't get the "people don't like touchscreens" memo. And it's really too bad that Nokia's still waiting for demand to pep up before jumping into those scary waters, it'd be a shame to miss out on the "next big thing."

[Tony @ Jun 18th 2007 11:29AM]

Most companies don't have the balls to innovate. That's why there is only one true leader in this respect. A-P-P-L-E.

[Wendy @ Jun 18th 2007 4:09PM]

HP have been doing touch screens for much longer...APPLE haven't been innovative, they've just copied, just like they did first time around from Rank Xerox...the iPAQ has been the first innovative product, and Nokia have the mobile market...Apple are good in style but lack real hardcore fundamentals.

[Tony @ Jun 18th 2007 5:26PM]

And the reason why no one talks about anything but Apple products is because..... ;-) I dont recall ever seeing a lineup at HP or someone knowing the entire line of products of a company. Sure some technology exists but what use is it to you if you can't access it. Apple owns in that regards, always has, and hopefully always will.

[Kyle S @ Jun 18th 2007 11:29AM]

I fucking hate thos touch screens, thats why im buying all your n series products. Damnit Nokia

[mike @ Jun 18th 2007 11:38AM]

@ Tony

There is no innovation at a-p-p-l-e. its combining a few technologies into a good looking package.

touchscreen (not new) + wifi (not new) + multitouch (first phone implementation).

[Todd Long @ Jun 18th 2007 12:04PM]

By your definition of combining those features/services that is being innovative on behalf of Apple. Though I believe it's being innovative in other aspects including the automatic switching between portrait and landscape mode based on orientation, multi-touch, and proximity sensor all combined into a single device.

[Logik @ Jun 18th 2007 8:58PM]

Exactly! It's like saying, "All these new metal allows, synthetic fibers and plastics are not innovative, because all of the materials/components to make them possible already existed." It is already known that many of the mechanical "discoveries" of the past 200-300 years we're not new. What was new and innovative was their applications in new and innovative ways.

[tekdroid @ Jun 18th 2007 11:40AM]

let's hope impossibly small screens used on 90% of phones will not be touch-enabled...

[Brandon @ Jun 18th 2007 11:43AM]

I believe Tony has had some of that Kool-Aid, no?

This iPhone is forcing A LOT of people into stupidity.

[andres @ Jun 18th 2007 11:51AM]

some people fear change... are you one of them?

[Rick @ Jun 18th 2007 11:43AM]

@mike--

innovation is not necessarily invention. Innovation IS doing something new.

[Dale @ Jun 18th 2007 11:51AM]

I partially agree, a lot of what Apple does is take existing technologies and sticky-tape them all together in a nice-looking package.

However, where they actually do innovate is the user interface, taking something and making it ridiculously simple for anyone to use. That's a lot of why the iPod is so popular, not just because it looks the best, but because it - and iTunes - are so ridiculously simple to use.

[Bachus @ Jun 18th 2007 11:54AM]

i'm glad nokia is taking it easy with this whole "touch screen" technology. it's only been used in PDAs for about what, 8 to 10 years now? someday it might just prove useful...

(btw tony, a-p-p-l-e is nothing more than a marketing machine. technology better than theirs abounds outside of their white curvy lines.)

[WL @ Jun 18th 2007 1:23PM]

I agree

[BobTurbo @ Jun 19th 2007 12:33AM]

Technology is not what people buy.

[Anthony @ Jun 18th 2007 12:00PM]

I think Nokia can be right & wrong @ the same time:

People don't like touchscreens. Touchscreens are the future.


Yes, PDAs *were* popular, but they used a stylus. No one's going to use a stylus to dial a phone. However, w/ Nokia's help (& others) touchscreens *will* become better.

There seem to be so much love/hate w/ Apple, but there's no denying that they can take technology that already exists, "tart it up" & make it popular. There's a lot to be said for that.

[Constable Odo @ Jun 18th 2007 3:43PM]

Believe it or not, people thought the automobile just a passing fad. The average person believed commercial airflight was only for the very rich. I guess you were fairly upset when rotary dial telephones were being phased out for newfangled touch-tone technology. Maybe it will just take a bit of time for touchscreen technology to mature to become more prevalent and/or more useful. Are you saying touchscreen tech will never mature or be useful because you don't like it? Or that you just prefer mechanical/fixed keyboards? Products are driven by the majority of users and you may not be the majority. You might eventually have to concede to the majority or be left out. When Nokia converts it's future top models to touch screen technology, I guess you'll balk and continue to use their older models if they still have them. Try to be a little more tolerant with technology changes. You're probably young right now and have a long way to go in your life to see many unexpected changes in technology. Maybe touchscreen will be a passing fad on the way to voice input or some newer way to input data. A number of analysts are saying that the iPhone will definitely cause companies and users alike to rethink cellphones/smartphones/pda's. We'll see in a relatively short time who's right or wrong.

[tekdroid @ Jun 18th 2007 12:02PM]

andres @ Jun 18th 2007 11:51AM
some people fear change... are you one of them?
-------
Some people fear loose change from paying for a touchscreen device worth several hundred dollars :D

[andres @ Jun 18th 2007 2:08PM]

touché

[Todd Long @ Jun 18th 2007 12:04PM]

By your definition of combining those features/services that is being innovative on behalf of Apple. Though I believe it's being innovative in other aspects including the automatic switching between portrait and landscape mode based on orientation, multi-touch, and proximity sensor all combined into a single device.

[AC @ Jun 18th 2007 2:05PM]

The portrait/landscape orientation has been in Sony MP3 players for years...

[Todd Long @ Jun 18th 2007 2:13PM]

Ok but now it's combined with a camera/cell phone/music player/video player. Just curious but what Sony mp3 players have this automatic capability?

[ShadowVlican @ Jun 18th 2007 9:36PM]

why the fuck does an MP3 require orientation detection

[craig @ Jun 18th 2007 12:09PM]

That's what you get for talking to executives. The proper interpretation is "we don't know what the hell we're doing". That's evident by the usability of the devices they offer as well. It's a sad state of affairs when Windows Mobile is best of breed. That's the iPhone's true opportunity.

[michael @ Jun 18th 2007 1:17PM]

@Craig:

What are you talking about, Windows Mobile is a great phone OS. In a business use, it's very handy and quite useful. Mobile Office is useful when you're waiting in a long line, and have some quick down time to fix a doc. Windows Mobile has more functions than most other smartphone OS's, and does them quite well.

iPhone is neat too, but in the smartphone sense, it's doesn't do the business end real well. It's more like a toy phone, something nice to use and really beautiful. But for business use, as of now, it's not that good.

[ShadowVlican @ Jun 18th 2007 9:39PM]

Windows Mobile is an unstable piece of crap

i've got the Qtek S200... and let me tell you i've never had to reset a PHONE this many times before

not to mention that the entire Windows Mobile OS is NOT intuitive at all... they simply took windows 3.1 and shrank it down

i welcome the iphone and hope companies will follow suit and design something that is truely mobile and FINGER TOUCH ORIENTED

[George @ Jun 18th 2007 12:11PM]

Apple is similar to america online in that it is the easiest to use and appeals to everyone because their products look cool but arent always the best products. I wanted an iphone a week or so ago but decided to go with the samsung blackjack instead. the only difference i have seen so far is it isnt an mp3 player,isnt touchscreen and doesnt have wifi. but it also only cost me $74 and after selling my current phone it cost me nothing compared to an iphone which is $600 before other fees. Now if anyone tells me that an ipod is better than a toshiba gigabeat,zen vision, or zune i would say your blind. The user iterface needs updating on the ipods as they are now old and the only way an ipod is better is because you can have a good selection from itunes and there are more accesories for an ipod only because it is more popular.

[Mike @ Jun 18th 2007 12:20PM]

The only thing that I would say an iPod is better at is truckload of accessories that are available. I bought a iPod Photo a few years ago because I could also buy a car kit that integrated with my car stereo (uses in car controls to control iPod, no RF, no silly remote, no fiddling with the iPod to change songs). Other then that the iPod isn't much better then my original Rio PMP300 (other then 32 megs vs 60 gigs :)

[carlo @ Jun 18th 2007 12:18PM]

Ugh, MORE CRYING ABOUT APPLE!!! This is about Nokia, and their corporate whatchamacallit having said people don't like touchscreens.

I don't think as many people have touchscreen phones (not PDAs), or have ever used them to make that statement. You can't prove the existence of something just because something else is lacking. Can't prove that causality.

[Ron Knight @ Jun 18th 2007 12:24PM]

First of all, Touchscreen technology has been around for thirty years now. So far the marketplace has given the whole idea a thumbs down.

Why all the hype on an old idea?

[carlo @ Jun 18th 2007 12:41PM]

Sure touchscreen has been around for a long time, but it's not the same as it was before--both in the way it is perceived and in the way that it works. Do you remember the demand for palm pilots? Have you been to the store lately or used a debit card or credit card?

You'd be mistaken to say that touchscreen hasn't changed or become implemented in our lives. You don't seem to have even noticed it--which is kinda creepy if you think about it.

It's become an "embedded" technology that a lot of people don't even notice because they have become so accustomed to the convenience it provides.

[Aaron @ Jun 18th 2007 2:23PM]

Carlo; You're right. How did Apple get into this conversation?

Anyway, I've used PDA's for a few years and they do have touch screens with many apps being able to be operated with one finger. There were also on screen keyboards with predictive text entry that could be operated with one finger.

Although it may seem like ancient history, Nokia must have missed the memo when Palm, HP and Dell were fighting it out in the PDA market place only a few years ago.

With the rise of smartphones and the ability to put phone functionality in a PDA, traditional PDAs had to give way.

When I decided to make the switch, I really thought I would miss touch screens like on a PDA. But I've found the opposite to be true; don't miss the touch screen at all. The smaller the device, the less I find I want to touch it.

I currently own a Nokia E62 and it doesn't have a touch screen. On a device that small, I would really rather have a thumb keyboard and a d-pad for navigation than touch. My next phone will be Windows Mobile but won't have a touch screen.

I used to wonder how I would live without a touch screen, now I wonder why I would want to live with one.

[Miker @ Jun 18th 2007 12:44PM]

...and blind people around the world go "thank you VERY much Apple/Nokia, we can't use the frigging things as there's nothing tactile about them!"

[robogeek @ Jun 18th 2007 3:09PM]

Touchscreens are very restrictive, Capacitive touch sensors are as well. My wife is legally blind and can't use the vast majority of new technology because it is too small, you can't feel the buttons, and you cannot tell what the interface is doing.

If you are blind and you can't tell where the capacitive touch button is how can you press it.

If you are blind and you have an ever changing touch screen how the heck can you use it.

I understand there are solutions like the Humanware Trekker (http://www.humanware.ca/web/en/p_DA_Trekker.asp) but the darn thing is $2,000 and something like that for someone who can see is under $500. If apple, nokia, and others would think about usability for the blind it would be great. They probably won't though.

[Constable Odo @ Jun 18th 2007 3:52PM]

The blind might not be candidates for using this version of the iPhone and will be required to use another type of device. Apple is not targeting the iPhone for the blind. Commercial industries are not driven by blind or handicapped users. That's niche stuff for small companies. I can't imagine tactile feedback from an iPhone but maybe some sort of audio feedback would be useful and possible using OSX.

[Michael Knutson @ Jun 18th 2007 12:47PM]

Nokia has been a very conservative company in the past (remember, they started out making cables and rubber boots [wellies]). When I worked in Finland, starting in about 1981, I remember that they got into the PC game with a product called MicroMikko, but very late, and with a rather me-too product. As they did with their line of minicomputers called Mikko (IIRC) a bit earlier. So, their strengths are manufacturing rock-solid products, not particularly innovation. In the mobility era, they've gotten much better, but it's still a company based on conservative Finns ... Mikko K

[cpitch @ Jun 18th 2007 12:53PM]

I loved the Nokia 7710, a few buttons (certainly no keyboard) but a huge touch screen. Personally I'm incredibly disappointed with the iphone. whoa there apple.. way to innovate a smart phone with no voice calling, picture messaging, no 3G no native apps, no ability to download media on the phone itself.. how VERY 2003 of you. A phone so mediocre they can't get the WiFi stats of their competition right! Good job the people at Nokia, Motorola and SE know how to "innovate" some decent phones.. Nokia, make a new touch screen phone (ideally touch screen S60) and I'll be a very very happy bunny. I do own a mac and several ipods. the iphone is just a fairly poor phone.

[ScOObyDoo @ Jun 18th 2007 12:55PM]

Typical Nokia. They are always one step behind in major innovations. I remember sitting at a conference at CeBIT in 1998 where Jorma Ollila told everyone he didn't believe in "tri-band" phones (this was the year Motorola introduced the first Timeport phone). Of course, once every other major brand in the world made a tri-band phone Nokia suddenly embraced it.

Nokia is great at adding stuff nobody really needs, just look at some of their past phones, fashion phones, phones without a keypad, their attempts at a music phone, the N-Gage etc...

[Xultar @ Jun 18th 2007 1:01PM]

Constructive comment...

The guy in the pix is HOT! I'd hit it.

[jaysins @ Jun 18th 2007 1:44PM]

Well I'm actually going to try commenting on the article to change up the pace in here. Nokia has released a touch screen phone before, http://www.mobileburn.com/review.jsp?Page=1&Id=2767. They also have a pretty popular lineup of touch screen enabled devices, the Nokia 770 and the newer 800 internet devices. Nokia can and has made good products with good touch screens. I've used the 800 and it's pretty nice though typing is a pain.

Nokia devices seem to be smaller and thus a touch screen, no matter how good, isn't really a good idea for them. My N95's screen is way to small for a good touch screen. Most of Nokia devices are quite small and you really need a bigger screen if you want to implement a touch interface. Which of course requires a taller and wider form factor than the majority of Nokia's phones. So if Nokia does start bring out more touch screen phone they are going to have to have a larger screen and thus be a little bit bigger. Plus on smaller devices buttons imo just seem to be much easier. I can browse and navigate on my phone very quickly and a touch keyboard, which would be mandatory on a very slim touch screen phone, would be horrible on many phones.

[Tom @ Jun 18th 2007 3:23PM]

this guy is mad viking.

[Falcon @ Jun 21st 2007 6:41AM]

Lots of people seem to dis Apple - but I am with the first comment on this page from Tony - Apple is one of the most exciting and innovative companies in history. The whole I phone concept has now spurred people as large as Nokia to jump on the bandwagon. And PLEASE - all of you - touch screen from ipaq etc etc - REMEMBER that the NEWTON message pad from A P P L E started this whole pda business in the first place. That should put an end to debate on innovation and touch screens . Apple preceeded the palm !!!

[Richard Brown @ Jun 23rd 2007 1:17PM]

No innovation? Nothing new? Clearly, this string has been created by non-creatives, those who have never applied, nor been granted a patent. It is not easy. In the extreme. Because, yes, indeed, almost EVERYTHING has been invented. The key word is “almost.”

The iPhone can be called “revolutionary” as opposed to “evolutionary” as the naysayers and Apple haters of this string would imply. iPhone has been granted a variety of patents. Why? Because all of the technology, including touch screens, were paleolithic, useless, and pointless to date, which is exactly why others rail about it here.

Apple reinvented it. And it was granted patents - the ultimate proof of innovation, and proof no other company was up to the challenge at the time. It is NEW, the state of the art. Those wanting this new order of functionality will have to license it from Apple. Or design something better. More power to them! I daresay they will blow it if and when they try.

Others think the iPod is old news and needs to be rethunk. It has. Look at the iPhone’s iPod. It is demonstrably superior to every other personal music player in form and function.

It isn’t that you can just play music: emphasis on “JUST” — Atari Computers in 1984 could play music, had a robust, multitasking, windowed, mouse-based environment with choice of color or hi res mono screens, 3-D shutter glasses functionality, Microsoft software offerings, and when PC’s could barely type a letter, the absolute state of the art in desktop publishing with PageStream and Calamus. The machines wiped the floor with the PC and the emerging Mac. For five seconds. And then, all things were PC and Mac, and we had to wait a lamentable decade for decent DTP.

In the end, it is NOT about the technology at all. It’s how well, how ergonomically, and how elegantly you present it to the market. STYLE counts. Clunky attempts to out-do the iPod, like the Zune, have all been nothing but embarrassments, and none have threatened Apple’s market share. It’s the iPod which has become the “Scotch Tape” of the personal music player industry. You think Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing (3M) is happy that EVERY sticky tape is now “Scotch Tape?” The difference is, iPod singularly and boldy stands as a hallmark of innovation envied by all. UNLIKE Scotch tape, every person in the world knows an iPod from EVERYTHING else.

Concerning the future of the iPhone, because it has a much more computer-like performance (if you don’t know what this means, open your eyes) than most other phones, and because the phone is NOT tied to a single purposed keyboard, the opportunity to make iPhone, through software and an infinitely repurposeable interface, the 800 pound gorilla of cell phones, business or otherwise, is more than possible. It’s imminent.

[KPO'M @ Jun 25th 2007 9:25PM]

The interface is the biggest innovation on the iPhone. Patents on specific technology notwithstanding, the touchscreen will be implemented on other phones by other manufacturers in a similar fashion.

The problem I have with Apple is that they put together a nice phone with a slick interface, and then dummy if up by putting in a 2 megapixel camera instead of a 3.2MP or 5MP like other phones, not supporting MMS, and making the battery and memory non-removable instead of using removable batteries and microSD. Also, what's the point of putting in a rock-solid operating system such as OS X if you're not going to allow third party apps (those web apps Jobs is touting will be easily ported to other browsers - particularly the S60 browser, and so won't be unique to iPhone)?

Also, AT&T has a 3G network, so why not release a phone that works with it Day 1? I'm sure it will in the next version, but why wait?

As for iPod, the main advantage it has is the iTunes music store. That was a smart move by Apple, since it gave them the ability to build a Microsoft-style monopoly on the music player business. Innovation on the iPod slowed to a crawl after 2004. Hopefully, some of the iPhone features will make it to the next iPod.

[Joe @ Jul 25th 2007 1:25PM]

what about the NOKIA 770 and the N800? i personally own the 770 and it's brilliant. The only con to it..no msn built in...