The company formerly known as RIM, whose claim to fame is the BlackBerry smartphone line, has changed their name to BlackBerry. I, for one, am entirely ecstatic about this, as this will be the last sentence I will ever write explaining that RIM is the company that makes the BlackBerry. Most people had no idea who RIM was, they just assumed the company was called BlackBerry. Apparently, RIM finally got the hint. Oh, and by the way, the company also finally released their long-delayed and somewhat-anticipated new smartphone platform, the BlackBerry 10.

I long ago wrote off RIM, er BlackBerry, as dead. Once they announced they were delaying BB10 until after the 2012 holiday season, I called Time of Death. Truly, last year was their only chance at capitalizing on a new platform, and by missing the holiday season, they effectively lost an entire year. Assuming there even is room for a 3rd place competitor in the mobile device market, BlackBerry will be fighting for table scraps against Microsoft and there really won’t be any winners in that war.

By and large, most pundits agree that BlackBerry’s chances are extremely slim. But if you follow the technology industry at all, or if you are exposed to people in the technology industry, you will read or hear some positive reviews as well as some arguing that BB10 will save BlackBerry. Let me summarize why none of this matters, especially to consumers and small business owners.

While I haven’t had any hands-on with a BB10 device (the devices won’t be released until March or April), many reviews are positive regarding the BB10 user experience. I won’t argue those points. The real question should be is BB10 so much better than its competitors that it will cause a huge defection from people using iPhones or Android-based phones? Almost certainly not. Especially considering that changing phones will mean the loss of purchased apps for that platform, and in the case of the iPhone, a move away from the iTunes ecosystem. BB10, just like Microsoft’s Windows 8 phones, will have a huge challenge fighting the inertia of the installed user base of the iPhone. Evidence shows Android phone users are not as loyal, so they might gain some adopters from that platform, but not likely much of any consequence.

Why should you care if BlackBerry has a large marketshare? The reality is that most developers will not put the effort into writing Apps for a platform without a sufficient user base to profit from. But without quality Apps, a platform will not attract a large user base. It’s a chicken-and-egg problem that BlackBerry just doesn’t have the time or financial resources to overcome. Microsoft maybe, but even that’s to be seen.

One train of thought I’ve seen from technology writers is that the BlackBerry 10 will be a hit among its traditional stronghold of corporate IT departments. They claim that IT departments will be eager to upgrade the BlackBerry devices they currently deploy to their corporate users. This might be true, although there is also a chance that IT departments will be slow to adopt the entirely new BB10 platform, either because they want to take the time to thoroughly test it or because they aren’t convinced of its future. Even assuming that IT departments like the BB10 platform, the reality is that it simply doesn’t matter.

First, corporate smartphone users, who used to make up the vast majority of the market in The Old World of Technology, now make up a fraction in The New World of Technology. Consumers and small business owners now rule the roost, and they have all but forgotten about BlackBerry. Second, because of this consumerization of the technology market, the Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) movement is spreading rapidly across the corporate IT world. In a nutshell, BYOD is the idea that employees are expecting that their workplaces will support the use of their personally-owned technology devices, such as smartphones. By and large, these devices are iPhones – not BlackBerry phones. And by and large the movement is so strong that corporate IT departments have little choice but to comply with their users’ wishes. The era of corporate IT dictating smartphones to their users has passed. The idea that corporate IT will have any significant influence on the smartphone market is wishful thinking.

The bottom line is that if BlackBerry’s only hope is in corporate IT, then they have almost no chance at all. The era of trickle-down technology, where small business and consumers waited to see what technology shook out from big business, is over. Since small business and consumers drive The New World of Technology, BlackBerry has simply become irrelevant. BB10 is BlackBerry’s last gasp before they sink below the surface; don’t get dragged down with them.

A recently uncovered Apple research study showed that prior to January of 2011, the largest factor for people buying an Android phone instead of an iPhone was that the iPhone was not available on their carrier. This was just prior to Apple releasing an iPhone for Verizon in February of 2011 and then later for Sprint in October of that year. Since last year, the iPhone is now available on the top three carriers in the United States. Not coincidentally, iPhone sales have continued to grow at record paces, and as I wrote previously, carriers who don’t have the iPhone are losing customers to those that do.

The release of the next iPhone model this fall will mark the second upgrade cycle opportunity that customers will have to switch to the iPhone on Verizon and Sprint. This past year I have seen a high number of my clients switch to the iPhone that have Verizon or Sprint. I know many people who say they are waiting for the next iPhone to switch away from their Android or BlackBerry phones this year. Assuming that this small sample size will extrapolate out further, Apple stands to benefit from some pent-up iPhone demand this upgrade cycle. By next year’s iPhone release, customers on Verizon and Sprint will have had at least two full years to complete the usual two-year contracts that most carriers require before upgrading their phones. I expect that we will see the full impact of Apple’s entry into the Verizon and Sprint markets by that time.

Regardless, even if one is inclined to look at the raw marketshare numbers of the various Android-based smartphones on the market, the reality is that pure volume does not drive the success of the smartphone market. Studies have shown that iPhone users are very different than Android users, primarily when it comes to spending money on apps or driving profits for mobile carriers. In addition, Apple makes a lot of money from their iPhone sales, where most of the various Android device makers are not generating great profits, nor does Google derive any real profit from their Android platform. For the sake of the long-term health of a platform, not making any profits doesn’t bode well for continued industry support.

The bottom line is that any perceived marketshare victories for the Android platform in the past were largely due to the simple fact that people who wanted the iPhone on their carrier couldn’t get it. After this upcoming upgrade cycle, we should see further evidence of the ever-growing dominance of the iPhone. There’s little reason to believe that the iPhone is losing its status as the premier smartphone platform, especially when bolstered by the dominance of the other iOS device, the iPad. If you are considering an iPhone or iPad purchase, proceed without hesitation. If you are planning an Android device purchase on the premise that the Android platform is reaching parity with Apple’s iOS devices, please consider very carefully before committing your money.

One of the great folklores of the technology industry is the story of the Osborne Computer Corporation and their demise due to an ill-timed product announcement. According to the tale (of which the details may or may not be accurate), Osborne pre-announced an upcoming new computer in an effort to stave off competition. But instead of wooing customers from their competitors, this announcement led to the sudden cancellation of orders for their current computer model. They could not ship their new model for several months, inventory piled up even with drastic price cuts, and in the mean time, the lack of cash flow killed the company and they filed bankruptcy. Regardless if it is completely accurate, the story is so well-known that the term “Osborning” or “pulling an Osborne” is understood to mean when a company’s announcement of a future product kills the sales of its current products.

I bring up this bit of tech lore because perhaps Nokia has Osborned its current line of Symbian smartphones, or at least it seems they are very afraid they have. By publicly aligning themselves with Microsoft’s Windows Phone 7 operating system, many questions arose over the future of the Symbian line of phones. Nokia didn’t do themselves any favors by not clearly defining their intention for Symbian. They only gave a very confusing statement by calling Symbian their “franchise platform”, virtually ensuring that anyone who has any vested interest in the platform was left in limbo. I myself questioned how Nokia would be able to successfully split focus among Symbian and Windows Phone 7.

Now a Microsoft executive is publicly urging Symbian developers not to abandon that platform. This is highly unusual that an executive of a company tries to bolster a platform with which they virtually compete. Of course, now that Microsoft and Nokia have partnered it is somewhat understandable, but it is still very strange that Microsoft would make this announcement instead of Nokia. It appears to me Nokia fears that the Symbian development community doesn’t believe what Nokia is saying so they figured they might believe Microsoft.

Yet, even Microsoft’s statement is confusing as in virtually the same breath they encourage Symbian developers to stick with it, they also encourage them to get familiar with Windows Phone 7. The entire situation reminds me greatly of politicians spinning damage control. The common perception is that Nokia is abandoning Symbian and so developers are hesitant to continue to support that platform, and I’m sure certain large corporate buyers are questioning the platform as well. Nokia is trying to manage the situation so that they don’t get Osborned, because if the bottom falls out of the Symbian market before they get rolling with Windows Phone 7, it could greatly hurt Nokia’s chances to remain a significant player in the smartphone market – which ironically is exactly what they are trying to achieve by partnering with Microsoft. As I mentioned in my previous article, this is the risk they felt they had to take, but perhaps they didn’t anticipate the Osborne Effect.

Which just goes to show that those who don’t study their tech history are doomed to repeat it!

A few days ago, Nokia CEO Stephen Elop sent a memo to his company admitting what was clear to most in the industry: Nokia has fallen way behind in the smartphone market. He used an analogy of a man standing on a burning oil platform in the North Atlantic. The man could either stand on the platform and die for certain, or he could jump into the frigid waters and risk freezing to death. While the man would never have jumped into the water under any other circumstances, it was his only chance at survival. So he leaped. He relates this story to Nokia. The current situation dictates they must make a drastic decision or face certain doom.

Today, Nokia and Microsoft announced a strategic alliance where Windows Phone 7 will become the primary smartphone platform for Nokia. Also significant, at least within the organizational structure of Nokia, is that they will split their mobile business into two units: Smart Devices and Mobile Phones.

My first thought was that this alliance would be beneficial for both companies. Nokia gets a modern smartphone platform and Microsoft gets the support of the largest cellphone manufacturer in world. However, on further inspection, this isn’t necessarily a slam dunk.

It is interesting that Nokia has chosen to split their operations between “smart” devices and “non-smart”. It speaks to their view that the two markets are so distinct that they should completely separate the two. Is this the right decision? Time will tell, but can a company sustain two separate focuses like this? It may be that they must to have any chance of success. If one fails, the other may survive.

Also interesting is that Nokia will retain their previous flagship platform, the Symbian OS. They are now calling it their “franchise platform”. This very vague description makes it difficult to understand what Nokia’s intention is. Yet, it is clear to me that they are still following the same path that the “old guard” of the smartphone industry have followed: place their bets across various different platforms and various different form factors and carriers. Nokia’s CEO acknowledges that Apple changed the game, in fact using that very phrase. Yet he apparently fails to grasp how they did it: by focusing. Apple didn’t create multiple form factors and didn’t attempt to spread their phone around every carrier they could. And they definitely didn’t create multiple operating systems.

And I don’t know about you, but comparing your new business partner to jumping in the the North Atlantic doesn’t exactly make it sound like a trusting relationship. But then when you’re getting into bed with Microsoft, I guess it doesn’t hurt to sleep with one eye open.

So looking at the deal, while it could be a powerhouse arrangement, I don’t believe either company has the marketing prowess to make it highly successful. This is primarily because both companies don’t have the necessary focus. Microsoft is still courting other phone vendors, and Nokia has other platforms they are still clinging to. So unless both companies are willing to completely commit to each other, like any marriage, it just isn’t going to end up well.