Anyone who has read a lot of my columns probably knows that I believe the future of the mobile phone will all boil down to two platforms: iOS and Android. This mirrors the fact that Windows and Macintosh are the two major platforms for the PC. This doesn't mean there Linux isn't lurking or Win Phone 7 isn't waiting for an opportunity.
It's just that technology cannot have too many platforms because of the third-party support problem. The way tech is set up, unlike cars or other segments of modern life, there is a reliance on third-party support to create the interest in the platform. Developers will flock to a platform that can make them money, and that means they flock to the biggest audience they can find.
These third-party apps tend to create more of a buzz than the phone alone. This sells more phones and the cycle begins.
As many people have heard of Angry Birds, for example, as have heard of the Android-powered Samsung Galaxy S.
This thesis leaves out Windows Phone 7, Palm and RIM, except as being in the Linux-type niche.
So can any of these three survive? Probably any one of them can survive, but I think RIM can actually thrive if it rethinks its model and adopts the Android OS—with a twist. Here's why and here's how it has to do this.
First of all, people love the Blackberry phone. Why? It's because it has a keyboard and its own infrastructure. Those two reasons are not going to change. Thus, its OS is not important, except for the fact that it operates the keyboard and talks to the infrastructure.
If RIM can shoehorn its designs and cobble them onto an Android OS for market compatibility and the collection of apps, it can move ahead of the other wannabes.
In other words, what are the chances of creating an Android phone with a Blackberry keyboard? That's the winning combination. I much prefer a phone with a real live keyboard as opposed to a virtual screen keyboard, which invariably botches much of what you type. A real keyboard is far superior.
I have heard numerous people tell me that they'd love a conventional smartphone, such as an iPhone, but they cannot live without their keyboard. They then usually brag about how fast they can type on the thing.
The problem is the obvious issue with screen real estate and thickness. All true smartphones must minimally have the screen size of an iPhone.
You cannot have this much screen real estate with the Blackberry keyboard, they all say. But is this true? Personally, I would like to see what a giant mobile phone would look like. By this I mean, a full-sized screen with a keyboard attached at the bottom. Why not?
I know designers like to find ways to tuck away the keyboard or make it flip or whatever. All these designs create a thick clunker, though. I want a svelte phone, like an iPhone or Samsung Galaxy S, not something thick. But would people tolerate additional 1.5 inches in length instead? I think that if it were designed properly and looked slick, then people would warm up to the thing.
It would be all or nothing. People would either think it was a cool and prestigious device or you'd get laughed at for owning one. I do not think RIM or Nokia or anyone else actually has the guts to give this idea a try, however.
But even if this idea isn't tested, something has to be done for the mass of mobile phone users who require a keyboard but also want a smartphone running an OS with a lot of apps.
RIM, this is a wide open door. Drive through.
You can Follow John C. Dvorak on Twitter @therealdvorak.
More John C. Dvorak:
Go off-topic with John C. Dvorak.