Live data from Hacker News

Nokia acquired by Microsoft

blogs.technet.com

311–320 of 573 posts

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#311
post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but it's not like anyone is making a killing off of all those Linux/Android powered devices out there. Except the users. Users win big time when there's an effective open source option for them to choose.

Not really, users don't care about open source. Users care about apps and services. Most developers care about the platform with more users that are willing to spend money on apps and services. I'm not saying that there are no open source fans, just that this is not what brings the food on your plate at the end of the month.

I think grandparent meant that users win out because open source almost guarantees that software stack will survive any hardships that mother company might not survive, as well as extra competition from open source alternatives.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That argument is stupid. Please give a source for "a lot of people" considering it superior. A lot of people I know consider the iPhone/Apple ecosystem superior. And no, you can't use market share to back this up, as much as you might want to. Because that doesn't measure user experiences being considered superior. There's a lot more factors that go into market share; that's just one of them.

It's not stupid. He just said what he knows anectodically, and I can confirm from many discussions I had. As a data point just take the number of people who chose Samsung Galaxy S4 or HTC One over iPhone, even though they cost more less the same.

As I said, market share is not an appropriate measure of a user experience people consider superior. People's choices of a Galaxy S4/HTC One over an iPhone could be caused by liking the Android UX more, but there's also many other reasons for it (friends like it more, already in Google ecosystem, upgrading from previous phone, etc). There's many possible reasons for one person choosing one phone over the other, and, while UX could be one of them, it's not the only one.

And anecdotes shouldn't be purported as facts.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft is also a completely different company now than it was dozens of years ago when this was an issue. They're more safe now, less risky.

“Microsoft executives have proved, time and time again, to be inaccurate, misleading, evasive, and transparently false. ... Microsoft is a company with an institutional disdain for both the truth and for rules of law that lesser entities must respect. It is also a company whose senior management is not averse to offering specious testimony to support spurious defenses to claims of its wrongdoing.” –Judge Thomas Jacks…

That's a dozen years ago. So while you may think it's relevant now, it's not.

Since then, most of the leadership has changed, and, really because of that lawsuit, Microsoft became more serious, precautious company.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#314
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.

I remember when the consensus was that there was no money in being an Android vendor, period.

I'm also not sure how the $10 billion valuation of Xiaomi, on sales of $2 billion Android phones figures into this "not making money" thing. Weirdly, those charts you see every few months that tell that "Only Samsung makes money from Android" don't include any of the top 5 smartphone sellers in China. I mean Lenovo is hardly an unknown name in tech.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its great, Why do I feel 7.2B is very low? The acquisition includes distribution channels around the world, factories, devices, R&D and softwares including google maps replacement Nokia Here, which in my opinion very good too. When we compare this to a software starup Tumblr with 1.2B this seems very less. I could be wrong and missing something big.

Nokia has lots of debt too, which makes It cheaper

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Microsoft is buying only Nokia's devices & services business, and debt will stay in Nokia. I tried to find any mention of the debt in official press release documents but I couldn't.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#316

To me, this is borderline criminal behaviour and shows once more that Microsoft is incapable of playing fair. Installing a trojan horse as Nokias CEO, who then proceeds to destroy any value left in that company so that Microsoft can pick it up for a cheap price. I'd be amazed if Elop is promoted to MS's CEO position for such deceitful behaviour

Maybe that was the outcome Nokia's board looked for from the start? I mean, they did choose Elop, and it was pretty clear where that would lead them. Nokia was on a downhill slope way before Elop came onboard.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#317

To me, this is borderline criminal behaviour and shows once more that Microsoft is incapable of playing fair. Installing a trojan horse as Nokias CEO, who then proceeds to destroy any value left in that company so that Microsoft can pick it up for a cheap price. I'd be amazed if Elop is promoted to MS's CEO position for such deceitful behaviour

The problem is that you could never prove it in a court of law.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#318

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…

> 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 any…

Samsung's line of Android devices became more profitable than Apple's iPhones at some point during, or just before this quarter (it's a bit vague because it's all based on estimates but it's basically happened already, we'll get the analyst estimates based on corporate announcements about a month after the end of the quarter).

Some would consider that "making a killing".

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#319

To me, this is borderline criminal behaviour and shows once more that Microsoft is incapable of playing fair. Installing a trojan horse as Nokias CEO, who then proceeds to destroy any value left in that company so that Microsoft can pick it up for a cheap price. I'd be amazed if Elop is promoted to MS's CEO position for such deceitful behaviour

I dunno about criminal, and nokia seems like an incompetent company (the smartphone market was theirs to lose and lose it they did), but I have to stand amazed at a couple players. Elop is returning to microsoft and Mark Penn, strategist from the hillary clinton presidential campaign, will be running marketing. Those two sure have the gift of failing up.

Re: Nokia acquired by Microsoft

#320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Microsoft executives have proved, time and time again, to be inaccurate, misleading, evasive, and transparently false. ... Microsoft is a company with an institutional disdain for both the truth and for rules of law that lesser entities must respect. It is also a company whose senior management is not averse to offering specious testimony to support spurious defenses to claims of its wrongdoing.” –Judge Thomas Jacks…

That's a dozen years ago. So while you may think it's relevant now, it's not. Since then, most of the leadership has changed, and, really because of that lawsuit, Microsoft became more serious, precautious company.

Last year, Microsoft was ordered by the EU to pay Euro 860 million, for breaking promises it made after the 2004 antitrust case. In March of this year, Microsoft was fined another Euro 561 million.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Post reply on HN