Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nokia acquired by Microsoft

blogs.technet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 573 posts

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#101

Post by shmerl »

corresation wrote: post #95
shmerl wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing great in notorious patent aggressor (MS) getting tons of mobile related patents...

Some reports are incorrectly stating that Microsoft is buying the patents, while Microsoft's own press release clearly states that they are only licensing them for a term of 10 years. This is almost certainly to satisfy regulators who will have final say over whether this transaction will close.

Somehow I expect that MS will still have a strong say in how those patents are going to be used. This already happened with attack on VP8 even without any acquisition. MS hand behind it was not even very hidden. It will only get worse now.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#102

Post by StandardFuture »

corresation wrote: post #84
rayiner wrote: post #38

This is a great move. There is no money in being an Android vendor except if you're Samsung and are totally vertically integrated. With Windows Phone, Nokia and Microsoft at least have some hope of carving out a profitable stake in the market. Anecdotally, I'm very impressed with some of the new Lumias. I got a 620 to replace my stolen iPhone, and for $200 unlocked its phenomenal phone. The build quality makes a flag…

There is no money in being an Android vendor except if you're Samsung and are totally vertically integrated. There are a lot of people who would have picked up the attractive, well built, well engineered Nokia devices if they had the platform of Android. The core problem with the "no money in Android" argument is that you can't choose not to compete with Android if you're in the smartphone game, which is pretty obvio…

> This new arrangement changes essentially nothing, but makes official what people long assumed

Precisely! There is no "new" move here. This was just the next step in a series of moves that have already been in motion.

I am curious as to how this will affect Microsoft's relationships with Samsung, HTC, and others.

This does open the door to more hardware options for them which could integrate with their other devices e.g. Kinect, One, potentially any PC running Windows, etc.

I remember Bill Gates talking about Microsoft research in pervasive computing. I imagine Microsoft may be trying to use Nokia's solid hardware business to start delivering 'pervasive' devices/services.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#103

Post by kyro »

rayiner wrote: post #38

This is a great move. There is no money in being an Android vendor except if you're Samsung and are totally vertically integrated. With Windows Phone, Nokia and Microsoft at least have some hope of carving out a profitable stake in the market. Anecdotally, I'm very impressed with some of the new Lumias. I got a 620 to replace my stolen iPhone, and for $200 unlocked its phenomenal phone. The build quality makes a flag…

Agreed re: Samsung. With this new acquisition, Microsoft now has the ability to control the entire mobile phone experience -- something Apple has had huge success doing for years now. They'll have a high-quality platform to promote their app store and create an interesting ecosystem. This'll also create a distinct image in consumer's minds of what the Microsoft Phone is, similar to what we imagine when we think of the Apple iPhone. Google doesn't have that control, and that puts them at a disadvantage. If I were Google, I would be looking for ways to create a very clear image of what it means to be using a Google Phone that doesn't include X number of vendor handsets running X^^2 versions of Android.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#104

Post by throwawaykf02 »

There was some credible speculation back then that Google bought up Mototorola because its CEO threatened patent warfare with other Android manufacturers, something Google really did not want happening.

Along similar lines, I speculate that Microsoft snapped up Nokia because they threatened starting an Android line of phones.

I think there's a significant business lesson in here somewhere... Something along the lines off "partner with a giant, then become dangerous to it"

Funnily enough, MS also gets a nice patent bonus along with its purchase as Google did with Motorola. However, I think Nokia's patent portfolio is much, much more powerful than Motorola's. This is for three reasons, two publicly evident and one anecdotal:

1) Apple admitted defeat in its patent fight with Nokia, something it hasn't done with anybody else;

2) Nokia has multiple patent lawsuits ongoing, and none of them involve standards essential patents, the one thing most likely to invoke the ire of the antitrust gods;

3) A previous boss of mine knew the head of Nokia R&D in America, and he regaled me with stories of smartphone apps they had working in their labs way back in 2006 that made me go "how the hell do they do that?" Unfortunately, any two-bit app developer can do those things today on any modern smartphone platform using publicly documented API. But I am still curious about what goodies they have hidden away in their labs today.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#106

Post by benihana »

macspoofing wrote: post #73
feniv wrote: post #11

Microsoft is becoming more and more of an integrated software and hardware company than a purely software one. Maybe it's time to change the name to something without the "soft".

They've been trying to ape Apple in consumer electronics for the last ten years. For some reason, they figure since Apple was making a butt-load manufacturing and selling their own Phones and Tablets, they should do that too. Meanwhile, Google follows the Microsoft OEM strategy and Android takes 80% of the market.

Google doesn't make the money on Android that Microsoft made on Windows though.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#107

Post by Apocryphon »

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #19

To everyone speculating about what this means for the possibility of Elop succeeding Ballmer: this means that Elop is succeeding Ballmer. End of story. edit: I would love to know why this is getting downvoted. edit2: fair enough. Two key facts: 1. Microsoft needs a new CEO. They have a limited pool to choose from. The following are seemingly reasonable candidates: - Mark Zuckerberg (never going to happen, he wouldn't…

How come Paul Allen left MS and never looked back?

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#108

Post by kibibu »

300bps wrote: post #71
kbaker wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Idk, sounds like the year of Linux on the desktop is closer than it has ever been. :) But you should really look at Chromebooks/ChromeOS for one glimpse of what a consumer-friendly, non-MS system would really look like. Right now it is the #1 selling laptop on Amazon, and reviews are pretty positive. If I was a shareholder in MSFT, I would seriously be worried for the future of the whole Windows platform, mobile and…

I started using Slackware Linux in 1997. If I had a nickel for everytime someone declared the Linux desktop is imminent since then I'd have more money than Bill Gates.

I'm not convinced it's been declared 1,340,000,000,000 times, but I get your point

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#109

Post by stormbrew »

300bps wrote: post #71
kbaker wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Idk, sounds like the year of Linux on the desktop is closer than it has ever been. :) But you should really look at Chromebooks/ChromeOS for one glimpse of what a consumer-friendly, non-MS system would really look like. Right now it is the #1 selling laptop on Amazon, and reviews are pretty positive. If I was a shareholder in MSFT, I would seriously be worried for the future of the whole Windows platform, mobile and…

I started using Slackware Linux in 1997. If I had a nickel for everytime someone declared the Linux desktop is imminent since then I'd have more money than Bill Gates.

If they said it before and they were wrong, surely that means they will be wrong forever!

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#110

Post by nemothekid »

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #19

To everyone speculating about what this means for the possibility of Elop succeeding Ballmer: this means that Elop is succeeding Ballmer. End of story. edit: I would love to know why this is getting downvoted. edit2: fair enough. Two key facts: 1. Microsoft needs a new CEO. They have a limited pool to choose from. The following are seemingly reasonable candidates: - Mark Zuckerberg (never going to happen, he wouldn't…

Why would Zuckerberg or Sandberg be good candidates from Microsoft CEO? Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to slight Facebook, but in my mind Facebook and Microsoft operate on two completely different wavelengths. I'm confident they wouldn't perform poorly, but I find it hard to believe they could provide the type of leadership and vision Microsoft needs right now. I'm just interested in hearing your thinking.

Also not really thrilled about Carly Fiorina, didn't she gut HP R&D division? I'm not sure your list is actually serious. Either way I'm doubtful Elop will become CEO given that he wasn't really able to make anything good come from Nokia.

Post reply on HN