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

201–210 of 573 posts

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#201

Post by BuckRogers »

macspoofing wrote: post #100
corresation wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>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. Yeah maybe. There is no guarantee that the outcome would have been more favorable than being bought out by Microsoft. >Apple obviously is very much in a battle with Android ... Apple already lost to Android. Last count, Android had 80% of the market. There is zero chance o…

> Apple already lost to Android.

That's not true. Apple's mobile devices are more profitable than any single line of Android devices. Also, sales of the iPad vs any other line of Android tablets, ie. Samsung's are not even close.

Your comparison is no different than comparing Windows Server vs Linux servers. Yes, it might have hurt the market for WinServer a little bit (and Apple's iOS devices), but it's not like anyone is making a killing off of all those Linux/Android powered devices out there.

When comparing what Android itself as a free platform (mostly free, there are contracts for Google's services that most sign onto)- iOS is far more profitable for Apple than Android is for Google.

What you're repeating is common man nonsense.

Secondly, FirefoxOS and Ubuntu Mobile will be cheaper devices and likely only cut into Android's marketshare. Add in Tizen, which is being specifically created to STOP paying fees to Google for Android, and you will see your 'zero chance' of Android's 80% marketshare changing. And sooner than you believe.

Android has the most precarious position as a 'free' choice. There are many more entrants on the way for the cheap market.

The war is just getting started, and I'd rather be in Apple's shoes than Google's (but you act as if Google cares about Android, they don't- it's just a delivery mechanism for their services).

Signed by someone who uses a GS3.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#202

Post by throwawaykf02 »

undoware wrote: post #48

Here's my take. Nokia's downfall has literally been the biggest business failure in the history of the planet - see communities-dominate.blogs.com for backstory. (As I mentioned in a previous post; I'm largely summarizing things Tomi proves with hard data.) My interpretation of this is that the increasingly untenable position of Stephen Elop began to incriminate the whole board, as any toppling of Elop would invite a…

I know a couple of savvy guys working for Intel's competitors moaning about how Intel is going to demolish them. Haswell and its descendants, it seems, are the real deal, and in the long term, they hold out little hope for ARM in the mobile space, let alone the server space.

I dunno about Microsoft, but I wouldn't be betting against Intel. (Just to be clear, I have no stock in or position on any of the companies mentioned on this entire thread.)

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#203

Post by tanzam75 »

StandardFuture wrote: post #186
macspoofing wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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. Yeah maybe. There is no guarantee that the outcome would have been more favorable than being bought out by Microsoft. >Apple obviously is very much in a battle with Android ... Apple already lost to Android. Last count, Android had 80% of the market. There is zero chance o…

I'm sorry but moving this conversation towards being about Android and Android's "market share" is going off topic. Microsoft clearly did not need to purchase Nokia to have a Windows Phone. That already exists (in partnership with multiple hardware vendors as well). So, market share of Mobile OSes is obviously not a (main) motivation behind this acquisition.

Nokia accounts for 80% of Windows Phone sales.

The "other OEMs" are basically HTC and Samsung. Both of which are primarily Android companies.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#204

Post by fpgeek »

sremani wrote: post #170
elorant wrote: post #46

So Microsoft just handed the entire Asian manufacturers’ bunch to the Android ecosystem. Not that they’re not already there but it would be hard for any manufacturer now to invest on Windows when they would think that MS is already giving the edge to Nokia. Also this comes like an acceptance from MS that they can’t penetrate the smartphone market. So they prefer to invest heavily on devices they own. Which is a first…

The real loss is only one OEM - HTC, other than that there is not a single one worth mentioning

Um, Samsung makes/made Windows Phones, too. They're heart might not have been in it, but if the platform was ever going to scale quickly they had to be involved. It would have been easier to convince them to make more/better Windows Phones than to get a big slice of their flash and RAM production some other way...

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#208

Post by mbreese »

psbp wrote: post #171
sjwright wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, a great move would have been for Microsoft to purchase RIM/BlackBerry three or four years ago, and focus on the corporate sector. They could have had the best information security story in the industry. They could have had the ultimate Exchange email experience. Together, these companies would have had a serious chance at being the indisputable third platform. On their own, they came up with a dozen incompatible…

Yes, a brilliant strategy to have an aging company buy a device maker that markets to an aging customer base.

No, it would have been brilliant. Microsoft is horrible at personal interfaces and trying to deal with actual people. But they are wonderful at enterprise. If either Microsoft or RIM had been able to say "Fine, we'll let Apple and Google play with their fancy new devices - we'll make products that let people actually get work done" that would have been a brilliant strategy. They could have completely dominated corporate mobile for years to come and put off the entire BYOD movement for a few years.

As it is, they each wanted to play the same game as Apple and Google, and that has failed dramatically for both. If they had decided to play a different game entirely, they would have been formidable.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#209

Post by frank_boyd »

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…

> I hope this portends a Microsoft phone...

I'm wondering, how can anyone buy and use a Microsoft phone, when we've learned that they partner with the NSA, killing our privacy?

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#210

Post by lsc »

It is a sad day. I have been joking with friends that we should have a funeral in sunnyvale. Probably, though, that would be in poor taste.

On the upside for nokia shareholders, well, when nokia switched to windows phone, it was widely reported that "Microsoft bought Nokia for zero dollars" - now, at least, the Nokia shareholders are getting paid for it.

Post reply on HN