121–130 of 166 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Elop had bet on Android instead of Windows Phone, Nokia would probably be doing well.
Almost certainly not. Have you seen the profit numbers at Samsung, Motorola, and HTC? They're getting destroyed by Android competitors like Xiaomi, Huawei, etc and Apple.
I was around when the takeover of Nokia R&D happened in Febuary 2011, I remember walking around the offices of Ruohulati in Helsinki and seeing a massive queue to the IT room, previously linux laptops were being reformatted to run windows. I asked one of the project managers: "why, will it really change that much for us, I mean, there's hope right?" they responded: "This is a takeover, I've seen it before, they're ju…
>Microsoft really loves to own and eventually destroy Nordic companies. (skype, minecraft, nokia)
Minecraft went from being neglected to even mismanaged to something that's alive again. Skype was originally Estonian, nor Nordic, and runs better than ever considering it doesn't rely on the charity of "supernodes" anymore. I can't remember the last time I had a dropped call or random quality drops.
I do agree MS shouldn't have picked up Nokia. It was a walking corpse and didn't help either entity in the end, but this is just business as usual. Playing up this "wild linux hackers vs The Man(TM)" is pretty out there. If you want a paycheck, the entity that pays you needs to make money. If MS didn't fire you, Nokia would have. MS is profitable. Nokia isn't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree that Nokia was too slow to compete, but they had massive advantages over both Apple and Google and with good guidance could've survived successfully. Even years after the iPhone came out, Nokia outsold Apple, had a bigger R&D budget and a bigger foothold in practically every market except North America. Smartphones outsold feature (dumb) phones only in 2013, five years after the iPhone came out. When did Noki…
> but they had massive advantages over both Apple and Google and with good guidance could've survived successfully. I can't agree more. Few people remember the Nokia 770 was released almost 2 years ahead of the iPhone. With a bit of polish it could have grown into a fantastic product line. In fact, the N9 was pretty much a masterpiece.
I owned one of these. It was an ugly, slow, expensive brick. I'd much rather use a Treo from that period. The iPhone was a wonderfully svelte device compared to either. I don't think you're appreciating how badly Apple beat up the Palm and Nokia competition back then. It was absolutely no contest and a disruption that was badly needed. Holding up the 770 as some under-appreciated jewel is fairly ridiculous. It was comically out of touch with consumers.
A lesson from Palm, Nokia, Motorola, and every other small-to-midsize company in the Telco arena: Never let yourselves be acquired. It won't end well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if Nokia 770 also was a phone? History could have been so radically different. I will never understand...
If the 770 was also a phone, it would have been a ghastly tablet with a phone inside.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Almost certainly not. Have you seen the profit numbers at Samsung, Motorola, and HTC? They're getting destroyed by Android competitors like Xiaomi, Huawei, etc and Apple.
What makes you think Nokia would have ended up like Samsung/Motorola/HTC rather than Xiaomi/Huawei/etc? Nokia at least had a chance to be one of the profitable ones.
Apple has 94% of the profits in mobile: http://iphone.appleinsider.com/articles/15/11/16/apple-inc-n...
We will never know for sure by Nokia shareholders might have gotten an amazing deal out of going Windows Mobile and getting acquired by Microsoft. As for the employees, this would have happened either way with how badly the company was prepared for smartphones.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Android isn't much worse off..
To be fair, Android wasn't established when it was acquired. It was still in early stages and not released in production devices. Google took it there (by financing, management or what, I don't know, but it happened after they acquired it).
(on the other hand it implies the behemoth of Nokia was "midsize", uh)
And in a court of law I will say that I just made all this up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but they had massive advantages over both Apple and Google and with good guidance could've survived successfully. I can't agree more. Few people remember the Nokia 770 was released almost 2 years ahead of the iPhone. With a bit of polish it could have grown into a fantastic product line. In fact, the N9 was pretty much a masterpiece.
>Few people remember the Nokia 770 was released almost 2 years ahead of the iPhone. I owned one of these. It was an ugly, slow, expensive brick. I'd much rather use a Treo from that period. The iPhone was a wonderfully svelte device compared to either. I don't think you're appreciating how badly Apple beat up the Palm and Nokia competition back then. It was absolutely no contest and a disruption that was badly needed…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As the second article says, it's not Nokia building them, but letting another company ("HMD global Oy") build them under the Nokia brand. This is similar to what they did with the somewhat recent Nokia N1 tablet: it was built by Foxconn.
This HMD global was founded by an ex-Nokia employee. Seems like the sleeper agents are being activated.