03-03-2014 10:07 AM
150 ... 23456
tools
  1. dznk's Avatar
    b)
    If the Android part of the Nokia X could sway a potential customer away from a Lumia, couldn't any one of the other gazillion low cost Android handsets do the same? I could be wrong, but I'm very sceptical this type of OS agnostic cross shopping occurs in significant numbers.

    Edit:
    Just saw your last post. I agree that the Nokia branding is the only thing that could cause Lumia to lose a sale to the Nokia X, that it otherwise wouldn't have lost to another Android device. What I'd love to see market research on is how big that group is expected to be... it's anyone's guess. You seem to guess at a larger number than I do ;-)
    Haha. Yep, it appears I do and it really is just a guess from me, but I know branding is important to many, but like you said, how large is this proportion. I'm certainly no market research guru, in fact how many times do they get it wrong with their own predictions... most times it seems :)
    02-26-2014 07:40 AM
  2. exsanguine's Avatar
    Tizen.

    Sent from my RM-877_nam_att_205 using Tapatalk
    02-26-2014 07:55 AM
  3. ohgood's Avatar
    lets talk about what matters:

    1 is the bootloader locked ?

    yes = fail, no xda hacking, no custom roms, no removing the ugly metro knockoff
    no = xda has a passing interest, like those puppies at the gas station



    2 sales. if they move 2 million units worldwide in 2014, it will be amazing. how will microsoft benefit from pissed off users that have no apps (nokia store isn't exactly bursting at the seams), a clunky metro skin, and 'services' that pale in comparison to what google offers ?

    are people really suggesting that there is a positive upgrade path spawned from aggravating first time buyers ?

    i don't see myself being excited about being a repeat customer directly after buying an inferior product, the company folding, and the new owner promising 'everything is working fine now, come buy again'.
    02-26-2014 07:59 AM
  4. rockstarzzz's Avatar
    One of the mods in our mod team suggested something that makes even more sense. It is a harsh angle but feels more closer to reality if you look at the bigger picture.

    Microsoft doesn't want Nokia X line. However, this was in pipeline already. Nokia already knew even though they are kings of WP, they are losing money. Let's be honest, WP hasn't attracted a traction. It is a marathon for Microsoft but what Nokia needed to survive was a sprint.So as much as Microsoft wanted Nokia to believe that WP will be alright by 2016, Nokia didn't have that money. Nokia decide to go full blown Android and Nokia X was something in pipeline to test waters and a back up plan in place to go full blown Android if by 2016 WP doesn't do what is says.

    However, Microsoft saw this as something harming the company and they just bought out D&S at Nokia. However, the model in pipeline was pushed out anyway by Nokia before deal is sealed. Why? Because they can still make small drops of money from whatever sales they make and prove a point.

    So Microsoft didn't buy Nokia only because it wanted to be Hardware and Services company but because it saw the threat that if Nokia splits loyalty between Android and WP, being the biggest WP manufacturer, WP won't survive. Thus, buy Nokia D&S and kill the dream which they effectively did. However, Nokia went ahead with what was in pipeline and will never get to put Android on it. Saves WP, keeps Nokia happy as it isn't a wasted efforts and Microsoft still has a saving tag line "It puts our services on more devices and that's our aim". In reality they are burnt but has to smile for now.
    02-26-2014 08:11 AM
  5. tgp's Avatar
    I suspect that for the most part, anyone preferring a Nokia X over a Lumia would likely also prefer any one of the other low-cost Android devices over a Lumia. I don't think there is a lot of cross shopping between OS', so the biggest threat to WP's success is its inability to grab market share away from Android in general. I doubt that any specific Android device significantly changes that dynamic.
    I believe that a lot of WP's sales are because of Nokia. Nokia has (or had) a good reputation in mobile phones. I wouldn't be surprised if a smaller percentage of WP users than we think chose their Lumia because its OS is WP, and more chose it because it's Nokia. So say that's the case, and it's now time to replace the device. If the user wans't satisfied with WP, they look and see that there's now a Nokia Android available. BAM, sold!
    02-26-2014 08:14 AM
  6. anony_mouse's Avatar
    Tizen.
    I am guessing that was a response to my request for evidence that Samsung will abandon Android. I'm afraid the existence of Tizen doesn't convince me. Whatever Tizen's merits, it will start from zero apps. Does anyone really see much chance at this stage for a 4th or 5th or whatever ecosystem in mobile?

    Now, if Tizen includes an Android runtime... it could be the new Nokia X. ;-)
    02-26-2014 08:16 AM
  7. tgp's Avatar
    I am guessing that was a response to my request for evidence that Samsung will abandon Android. I'm afraid the existence of Tizen doesn't convince me. Whatever Tizen's merits, it will start from zero apps. Does anyone really see much chance at this stage for a 4th or 5th or whatever ecosystem in mobile?

    Now, if Tizen includes an Android runtime... it could be the new Nokia X. ;-)
    I don't see it either, but Tizen would have one thing going for it in the mobile space. It's this little thing called "Samsung."
    02-26-2014 08:50 AM
  8. a5cent's Avatar
    If WP is so repellent so users (I'm not saying it is, but following the logic), is it better to just scrap it and use NokiaAndroid across the whole range?)
    You tend to see smartphone market share only as a means by which to earn money. More market share = more sales = more money.

    While I agree that is the ultimate goal, I tend to see market share also as a means through which companies can exert influence and control market and technological developments. Apple has demonstrated this a few times already, and they are currently at it again. Apple still makes insane amounts of money, but they are losing their ability to dictate where the smartphone market is headed and they have long lost their ability to dictate their terms to carriers, together with their market share.

    Using Android, the best MS can do is deny Google some of that influence. Using Android doesn't improve MS' standing in the influence and power game however, because MS doesn't control Android. That is why I disagree that scrapping WP is a reasonable strategy, at least for now.

    Regarding apps - Nokia X will not immediately have access to a large number of apps. Nokia will still have to persuade developers to port their apps (if necessary) and submit them to the NokiaAndroid app store. It will take some time to match the 200,000 apps in the WP store, and the usual chicken and egg problem will apply. How many Android apps are available for Blackberry??
    This was my initial concern as well. Apparently it is unfounded. The Nokia X isn't connected only to the Nokia X app store. It is connected to a number of other app stores and can be connected to anything except Google Play. Yandex was the primary example. It is my understanding that the Nokia X is compatible with everything in the Yandex store, so that is over 100'000 apps (mostly targeting Russian Android users) right there, on day one. This is completely different from Blackberry. For your basic AOSP app, no porting effort is required.

    You can actually upload the unmodified AOSP binary to the Nokia X app store, which will ensure you aren't calling any GMS specific APIs, in which case it would immediately report back on any discovered incompatibilities.

    Porting is only necessary for GMS enabled apps. Even then, the system is setup so that the same binary can be submitted to both Google Play and the Nokia app store.

    Given the above, it would be interesting to know why Nokia/MS didn't cut the price of WP to make it feasible to use on very low cost devices. Is there a fundamental technical reason why WP won't run on hardware similar to the Nokia X (I doubt it)???
    WP can run on anything MS wants it to run on. It's just a matter of time, money and effort. Though there is a limit to how low you can go down the hardware ladder while still offering a pleasant user experience. I don't know where that ladder ends for WP. Judging by what SoCs WP8.1 supports, it ends before we reach the hardware the Nokia X runs on, and the Nokia X family is free to go even lower. Side note: I think it would make sense to separate these two brands, that target different audiences and make different trade-offs, even if both ran WP.

    Why not give WP away for free, so as to get the price down as low as possible on what can still be considered "capable-enough" hardware? I don't know. I don't think that's a very important question though. All that would do is initiate a race to the bottom that still has little hope of making a dent in the market share equation. Even free WP is no longer enough. At this point, if WP can't offer something revolutionary that has wide consumer appeal and which Google and Apple can't replicate, Android may actually be the more capable weapon in combating Android than WP is. That is my take anyway.
    02-26-2014 08:52 AM
  9. a5cent's Avatar
    However, Microsoft saw this as something harming the company and they just bought out D&S at Nokia. However, the model in pipeline was pushed out anyway by Nokia before deal is sealed. Why? Because they can still make small drops of money from whatever sales they make and prove a point.
    This was amongst the earliest explanations for why the Nokia X exists.

    If it were true, then Nokia wouldn't be releasing the Nokia X now, because it costs millions to launch a device like this in 60 countries. Nokia would be financially better off doing nothing, because this just costs them money and passes off any future profits to MS, not themselves. IMHO this explanation can be ruled out.
    Last edited by a5cent; 02-26-2014 at 09:23 AM.
    02-26-2014 09:06 AM
  10. neo158's Avatar
    You all need to remember that the Nokia X isn't running the Google fork of Android, it's running the Microsoft/Nokia fork of Android. What this means is that you would probably sign in with a Microsoft Account so you're already using Outlook.com for your email, contacts and calendar this means that moving up to a WP is even easier as you're already using the key Microsoft services. Same goes for Nokia services as well.

    I know that this is probably pointing out the obvious but what I'm trying to do is put the Nokia X into context with moving up to a WP.
    02-26-2014 09:08 AM
  11. rockstarzzz's Avatar
    This was amongst the earliest explanations for why the Nokia X exists.

    If it were true, then Nokia wouldn't be releasing the Nokia X now, because it costs millions to launch a device like this in 60 countries. Nokia would be financially better of doing nothing, because this just costs them money and passes off any future profits to MS, not themselves. IMHO this explanation can be ruled out.
    Since we don't know what the terms are for acquisition, it may be a grey area. Most likely the acquisition terms suggest that Nokia *must* support all the current handsets in the market under Nokia brand name and also in return retains profits as usual. However, it cannot sell any new phones or make them either. This makes sense because we aren't expecting Lumias to vanish from all the shelves come April. Nokia won't make a new Lumia but will still be able to sell out the stock of whatever they have in the inventory. So if these Nokia Xs are still in the inventory then acquisition does not stop Nokia from supporting software on this phone i.e. fixes and extension and also does not stop them from selling whatever units they may have available by end of March. If this takes off, they are going to make profits as you pointed out earlier, Nokia X only may cost them $5 and if each unit goes at $60 world wide, they may be looking at a healthy profit margin to see them till the end of 2014.

    This will rule out the possibility of Microsoft being able to kill Nokia X as it may also not be able to destroy the inventory of Lumia phones that have Nokia written all over it, right?
    02-26-2014 09:27 AM
  12. anony_mouse's Avatar
    You tend to see smartphone market share only as a means by which to earn money. More market share = more sales = more money.

    While I agree that is the ultimate goal, I tend to see market share also as a means through which companies can exert influence and control market and technological developments. Apple has demonstrated this a few times already, and they are currently at it again. Apple still makes insane amounts of money, but they are losing their ability to dictate where the smartphone market is headed and they have long lost their ability to dictate their terms to carriers, together with their market share.

    Using Android, the best MS can do is deny Google some of that influence. Using Android doesn't improve MS' standing in the influence and power game however, because MS doesn't control Android. That is why I disagree that scrapping WP is a reasonable strategy, at least for now.
    For the record, I wasn't advocating MS scrapping WP. It was a provocative statement to test the idea. I don't currently think it would be a good idea, although if the X is a success, I might change my mind.

    I admit that I see sales as being ultimately the most important things. I have some experience of working with companies that think mostly about 'strategy' and 'influence', and I've very rarely seen it work out well for them. These are always large, successful companies who believe they can reshape their industry in the way most beneficial to them. The problem is that they forget about customers and are beaten by more nimble competitors who focus on what customers actually want, rather than what suits their corporate fantasies. Nokia is a classic example, and I'm sorry to say that I see Microsoft falling into this trap if they are not careful.

    The best way to influence the market is to make good products that people buy or use. Microsoft's most successful division in recent years has been servers, and they've done exactly that, even embracing technologies such as Linux that seem opposed to Microsoft's strategic interests, but that customers want to use. There is nothing wrong with companies trying to shape an industry, but they must do so by addressing customers' needs, and not just their own.

    This was my initial concern as well. Apparently it is unfounded. The Nokia X isn't connected only to the Nokia X app store. It is connected to a number of other app stores and can be connected to anything except Google Play. Yandex was the primary example. It is my understanding that the Nokia X is compatible with everything in the Yandex store, so that is over 100'000 apps (mostly targeting Russian Android users) right there, on day one. This is completely different from Blackberry. For your basic AOSP app, no porting effort is required.
    I hadn't seen that. It certainly helps to address the app availability problem, at the expense of giving away some of the ecosystem to others. But that could just be a temporary measure, until Nokia's own app store is well populated. Of course, I should remember my comments above as I write that. :-)

    Will these app stores be pre-installed on the X?
    02-26-2014 09:33 AM
  13. a5cent's Avatar
    Most likely the acquisition terms suggest that Nokia *must* support all the current handsets in the market under Nokia brand name and also in return retains profits as usual.
    I'd consider this extremely unlikely. Not only would it be unusual (profits, liabilities and everything on the balance sheet (including unsold stock) is typically transferred to the new owner), but Nokia has sold all the staff and infrastructure required to support the current handsets. That requires an army of people all over the world, and MS is about to own all of it.

    Nokia X only may cost them $5 and if each unit goes at $60 world wide, they may be looking at a healthy profit margin to see them till the end of 2014.
    You misunderstood me. $5 is the cost to license the IP for Android from MS. The margins on these low cost devices are razor thin. You must sell tens of millions of them just to earn back your R&D investments.

    I have some experience of working with companies that think mostly about 'strategy' and 'influence', and I've very rarely seen it work out well for them. These are always large, successful companies who believe they can reshape their industry in the way most beneficial to them. The problem is that they forget about customers and are beaten by more nimble competitors who focus on what customers actually want, rather than what suits their corporate fantasies. Nokia is a classic example, and I'm sorry to say that I see Microsoft falling into this trap if they are not careful.
    As do I. IMHO you are taking a very one sided view. You are looking only at these companies downfall, but you are ignoring how they got to those lofty positions in the first place. Particularly in the consumer electronics business, success is almost never awarded to the party with the technically best product. Every large company got to where they are through a sound business plan, precise execution, and an effective strategy. We usually only end up talking about those strategies when the companies have already become huge and very powerful.

    Every company is most successful when they can align their strategies with their customers interests. Google is a very good example, as they are definitely not just focused on making good products.
    Last edited by a5cent; 02-26-2014 at 07:00 PM. Reason: Spelling
    02-26-2014 09:54 AM
  14. anony_mouse's Avatar
    You misunderstood me. $5 is the cost to license the IP for Android from MS. The margins on these low cost devices are razor thin. You need to sell tens of millions of them just to earn back your R&D investments.
    That will be a significant advantage to Microsoft when they own Nokia. They won't have to pay the $5 (or whatever) to licence their IP that is allegedly in Android.
    BTW, do we know exactly what IP claim to own in Android? I believe it includes Exchange ActiveSync. I can imagine they also claim other stuff - I'd be curious to know what it is, and whether the claims have ever been tested in court.
    02-26-2014 10:03 AM
  15. a5cent's Avatar
    BTW, do we know exactly what IP claim to own in Android? I believe it includes Exchange ActiveSync. I can imagine they also claim other stuff - I'd be curious to know what it is, and whether the claims have ever been tested in court.
    I have never read that ActiveSync is involved. AFAIK the exact IP hasn't been disclosed, but it is understood to involve primarily file system related technologies, particularly technology related to support side-loading and SD cards, with some other stuff thrown in for good measure.

    Apparently it has been tested in court against Motorola.

    Will these app stores be pre-installed on the X?
    I don't think Elop was absolutely clear on the issue. The Nokia store will come pre-loaded on every device. My understanding is that Nokia will also pre-load other app stores, but which ones will vary, depending on the market in which the device is sold.
    02-26-2014 10:12 AM
  16. anony_mouse's Avatar
    As do I. IMHO you are taking a very one sided view. You are looking only at these companies downfall, but you are ignoring how they got to those lofty positions in the first place. Particularly in the consumer electronics business, success is almost never awarded to the party with the technically best product. Every large company got to where they are through a sound business plan, precise execution, and a sound strategy. We usually only end up talking about those strategies when the companies have already become huge and very powerful.

    Every company is most successful when they can align their strategies with their customers interests. Google is a very good example, as they are definitely not just focused on making good products.
    I think your last sentence was exactly what I was trying to say. :-)
    I'm not saying that companies shouldn't have a strategy. Of course they must. It's just that their strategy must take customers into account, rather than regarding them as an inconvenience or irrelevance. Large companies can sometimes take their customers for granted. I'm sorry to say that I think Microsoft did this with Windows 8. I also didn't say that companies must have the 'best' product. There are many other factors - price, getting to market at the right time, marketing, ecosystem, etc. (Some of this can be taken into account by some flexibility around the definition of 'best').

    I agree that there are occasions when companies can establish a good position in the market through 'corporate games' that don't address the customer, rather than decent products. Some might argue that Microsoft did this in the 80s - there may be some truth in that, although it is an oversimplification. However, it's quite rare and indeed we only remember the success stories. I would argue that the chances of a company doing it twice are low, and it requires some quite specific circumstances and a fair amount of luck. Companies need to assess the situation and ask themselves whether it is wise to bet on it happening twice.
    02-26-2014 10:51 AM
  17. anony_mouse's Avatar
    I have never read that ActiveSync is involved. AFAIK the exact IP hasn't been disclosed, but it is understood to involve primarily file system related technologies, particularly technology related to support side-loading and SD cards, with some other stuff thrown in for good measure.

    Apparently it has been tested in court against Motorola.
    Here's a couple of references to ActiveSync (including a court case lost by Motorola):
    HTC Licenses Microsoft Patents for Android €” Tech News and Analysis
    Motorola Loses ActiveSync Patent Dispute with Microsoft | Androidheadlines.com

    The filesystem stuff indeed is relevant - good point. Could this be a reason why some companies (Google, HTC) don't include SD card slots in some phones? I can imagine that the licence also includes IPR from the publicly unsubstantiated claim by Steve Ballmer than Linux infringes a couple of hundred Microsoft patents. Both sides would likely prefer broad coverage of possible Microsoft IPR in Android even if only a few claims looked credible, to avoid future legal risk (for the manufacturer), and to maximise income and provide credibility without having patents tested in court (for Microsoft) (*). The price would be based on the credible claims.

    I believe the filesystem patents are quite old and expire quite soon, so Microsoft's income from Android may soon reduce. Also, a court in Germany recently declared one invalid - I assume Microsoft will appeal.

    (*): The large majority of software patent claims tested in court are declared invalid - and that's before any assessment of whether they were infringed.
    a5cent likes this.
    02-26-2014 11:13 AM
  18. a5cent's Avatar
    I'm not saying that companies shouldn't have a strategy. Of course they must. It's just that their strategy must take customers into account, rather than regarding them as an inconvenience or irrelevance.
    If a company is so successful that they come to command an overwhelming majority share of a market, it is only natural for them to shift focus from acquiring new customers to retaining them. It happens to every company. Always. I'm unaware of this shift ever leading to decisions that were in the consumers best interests. That is just the nature of the game.

    Microsoft did it. Google is doing it now too, by deemphasizing AOSP and restricting all noteworthy developments to the proprietary parts of Android, confirming the rule of going against customer's interests.

    EDIT:

    In regard to IP.. as far as I'm concerned, nobody should be able to file any software or hardware patent for anything that can't be expressed mathematically. Beyond that I'm pretty much ignorant on the topic, because on that issue I choose to be

    Anyway, AFAIK, Support for ActiveSync has since been removed from the Android OS, so it doesn't apply to any newer device
    Last edited by a5cent; 02-26-2014 at 11:40 AM.
    02-26-2014 11:26 AM
  19. Reflexx's Avatar
    One of the mods in our mod team suggested something that makes even more sense. It is a harsh angle but feels more closer to reality if you look at the bigger picture.

    Microsoft doesn't want Nokia X line. However, this was in pipeline already. Nokia already knew even though they are kings of WP, they are losing money. Let's be honest, WP hasn't attracted a traction. It is a marathon for Microsoft but what Nokia needed to survive was a sprint.So as much as Microsoft wanted Nokia to believe that WP will be alright by 2016, Nokia didn't have that money. Nokia decide to go full blown Android and Nokia X was something in pipeline to test waters and a back up plan in place to go full blown Android if by 2016 WP doesn't do what is says.

    However, Microsoft saw this as something harming the company and they just bought out D&S at Nokia. However, the model in pipeline was pushed out anyway by Nokia before deal is sealed. Why? Because they can still make small drops of money from whatever sales they make and prove a point.

    So Microsoft didn't buy Nokia only because it wanted to be Hardware and Services company but because it saw the threat that if Nokia splits loyalty between Android and WP, being the biggest WP manufacturer, WP won't survive. Thus, buy Nokia D&S and kill the dream which they effectively did. However, Nokia went ahead with what was in pipeline and will never get to put Android on it. Saves WP, keeps Nokia happy as it isn't a wasted efforts and Microsoft still has a saving tag line "It puts our services on more devices and that's our aim". In reality they are burnt but has to smile for now.
    I think that's what happened too.

    But I think Nokia really did intend this to funnel users to Lumia.

    But its existence was a wake up call to MS, who didn't like the direction this was going, so it helped them in the decision to buy Nokia's D&S division.
    02-26-2014 12:44 PM
  20. Boris Lozac's Avatar
    I'm really struggling to see how this was a good move (for Microsoft and WP). As far as i can see, people already made 'system dump', they took out the Here Maps, Drive, Nokia Music, Nokia Camera and made them available for all Android phones, so there goes one of the biggest advantages of WP and Nokias. Why would anyone that is even a slight Android fan, buy a WP8 phone now?
    Nogitsune Micah likes this.
    02-26-2014 01:52 PM
  21. Nogitsune Micah's Avatar
    I'm really struggling to see how this was a good move (for Microsoft and WP). As far as i can see, people already made 'system dump', they took out the Here Maps, Drive, Nokia Music, Nokia Camera and made them available for all Android phones, so there goes one of the biggest advantages of WP and Nokias. Why would anyone that is even a slight Android fan, buy a WP8 phone now?
    The pro Nokia x fan base want you and us to see it the way they do...this is a long term investment. Apparently we are thinking in the short term and this is about getting first time smartphone users locked into Microsoft services while being desperate enough to use android.

    Never mind the fact that most of the same services are already available on android phones that have full access to android market.

    Apparently this is supposed to be a bait and switch because this will encourage people to get a windows phone for their next device when they wish to upgrade.....never mind the fact that it is likely they would just go to another better android phone vs buying a windows phone.

    Their argument is this is not meant to compete with windows phone and replace Asha except people are already talking about importing said devices from the countries to use in places where this technically won't be sold. Also the fact that these phones are not price to much lower than a better Lumia 520.

    Long story short this has nothing to do with windows phone and wpcentral and the other pro Nokia x fans are trying to feed us that bs.

    This has everything to do with Microsoft trying to push it services but not having a clue how to use their own OS to do so.....plain and simple.

    And I certainly hope this fails.
    02-26-2014 02:29 PM
  22. Boris Lozac's Avatar
    Nevermind the X series, they actually 'gave' all of the Nokia apps to Android users, simple as that. Maybe not legally but everyone knows how to install an .apk file. Boggles the mind.
    02-26-2014 02:36 PM
  23. Reflexx's Avatar
    The pro Nokia x fan base want you and us to see it the way they do...this is a long term investment. Apparently we are thinking in the short term and this is about getting first time smartphone users locked into Microsoft services while being desperate enough to use android.

    Never mind the fact that most of the same services are already available on android phones that have full access to android market.

    Apparently this is supposed to be a bait and switch because this will encourage people to get a windows phone for their next device when they wish to upgrade.....never mind the fact that it is likely they would just go to another better android phone vs buying a windows phone.

    Their argument is this is not meant to compete with windows phone and replace Asha except people are already talking about importing said devices from the countries to use in places where this technically won't be sold. Also the fact that these phones are not price to much lower than a better Lumia 520.

    Long story short this has nothing to do with windows phone and wpcentral and the other pro Nokia x fans are trying to feed us that bs.

    This has everything to do with Microsoft trying to push it services but not having a clue how to use their own OS to do so.....plain and simple.

    And I certainly hope this fails.
    If you're going to attempt to present the side that disagrees with you, I wish you would try to be accurate.

    It's been explained several times that this is as much about keeping people away from Google services as it is about using MS services.

    When you are tied into an ecosystem, it's harder to switch to a platform that doesn't support it.

    If someone wants to buy a regular Android phone, they will be tied to Gooogle's ecosystem. If they buy and X, they won't be.

    If at a later date they were to upgrade, MS has a fighting and fair chance to try to win them over with a Lumia if they already use MS services. If they are using Google services, it is much tougher because those services are unavailable on WP.
    02-26-2014 02:36 PM
  24. Reflexx's Avatar
    I'm really struggling to see how this was a good move (for Microsoft and WP). As far as i can see, people already made 'system dump', they took out the Here Maps, Drive, Nokia Music, Nokia Camera and made them available for all Android phones, so there goes one of the biggest advantages of WP and Nokias. Why would anyone that is even a slight Android fan, buy a WP8 phone now?
    The type of people that would do that wouldn't have bought WP anyway. They want to be able to root their phones and such.
    02-26-2014 02:38 PM
  25. Nogitsune Micah's Avatar
    If you're going to attempt to present the side that disagrees with you, I wish you would try to be accurate.

    It's been explained several times that this is as much about keeping people away from Google services as it is about using MS services.

    When you are tied into an ecosystem, it's harder to switch to a platform that doesn't support it.

    If someone wants to buy a regular Android phone, they will be tied to Gooogle's ecosystem. If they buy and X, they won't be.

    If at a later date they were to upgrade, MS has a fighting and fair chance to try to win them over with a Lumia if they already use MS services. If they are using Google services, it is much tougher because those services are unavailable on WP.
    I'm being entirely accurate. I'm regurgitating the bs I've been told these past few days.
    It does not matter if you are tied into the ecosystem using the Microsoft services with the x simply because you can continue the same experience with an an android phone....lmao people still casually always downplay that.

    I see the reasoning behind the x to prevent them from going to be locked in with Google but I wish the pro Nokia x crowd will stop with the "this will help windows phone in the long term" bs because that just sounds willfully ignorant to me.
    02-26-2014 02:51 PM
150 ... 23456

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 90
    Last Post: 01-30-2018, 03:31 AM
  2. Nokia X & Why it does not make sense lol
    By Nogitsune Micah in forum Nokia X
    Replies: 137
    Last Post: 04-25-2014, 07:59 PM
  3. Take an out of this world selfie and bag a Nokia Lumia Windows Phone
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-08-2014, 03:01 PM
  4. Nokia launches Imagin8 Mission to capture the imagination of developers
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-08-2014, 02:12 PM
  5. What did you learn from Stephen Elop's tenure in Nokia?
    By WanderingTraveler in forum Microsoft News & Rumors
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-24-2014, 11:03 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD