If Elop becomes the new Microsoft CEO will Nokia ditch WP?

[Mroofieunblockm]

This is interesting. MS is in a reshaping process most companies cannot do. This movement from a 100% software company to a 60% mobile/services company and a 40%-ish software company is a hard transition.

I am not sure Elop is the man for the job. I like im, but Nokia has not turned the corner yet. They are close, but still need MS to survive. MS needs someone with huge vision. Elop made good decisions, but not always in the best way. I think he needs to see things through at Nokia.

By the way, the Finish goverment would have a ton to say about a MS/Nokia merger or a MS outright purchase. Nokia is valuble as a partner. MS does not need them in the company.

Hay snowmutt

 

[Mroofieunblockm]

If Elop will become MS CEO, he will destroy it like he already destroyed Nokia. Transforming it from the biggest phone maker to shrinking and fading ghost. It will be the greatest news for Google, Apple and even Blackberry. Not for me or us.

lol what it seems you didn't do your homework

 

[Bob Shiska]

Yeap. Be interesting to see who they get. Nokia is not the problem. Nokia invented the smart phone, hold more patents than anyone; at one time Nokia was 70% of the global phone market top notch hardware, few apps they have also top notch. Under Balmer profits tripled while MS alienated customers with one bombed product after another and MS stock languished. MS needs a CEO not a super salesman with a marketing background like Balmer was. HP tried that route, didn't work out for them either, no coincidence that Balmer And HP'S former CEO rank no 1 and 2 in tech worlds most hated CEO's .Take care of the customer; rest will take are of itself

Bombed products like Win7 and XBox/XBox 360? There were a few missteps, and no marketing worth mentioning, but by and large he's done a decent job. The stock price everyone likes to focus on is because it was overvalued when he took the job, not because the fundamentals of the business have gotten worse.

 

[borasar]

The claims about how slow MS is updating the system are not based on the actual number of updates relative to the competition; no one is saying MS is releasing less or as many updates as iOS or Android, what people are saying is WP8 needs more updates, because it is missing certain basic features that other OS' have and has certain bugs that need to be fixed up. If you want WP8 to be more competitive then MS needs to move way faster than competition in introducing features and killing off the bugs, not a little bit faster or just as fast.

Ye gads, this thread's bad enough on it's own without arguing about the number of updates WP has had. Whether it's 2 or 3 really doesn't matter, it's had more updates than iOS and an equal (or almost equal) amount as Android in the same amount of time. Which means the claims about how slow MS is updating the system are groundless, at least in comparison to the other mobile OSs to which WP8 is often compared.

 

[bilzkh]

Here's a thought.

1. Microsoft buys all of Nokia with Elop as CEO.

2. Microsoft then binds Nokia's HERE team with its Services Division and the mobile devices team with the Software Engineering and Hardware Engineering, where applicable.

3. Put Nokia people in charge of Software and Hardware, and (if need be) fire existing MS people in order to transition into a fast-acting entity

4. Put Nokia's marketing people in key positions within the MS Marketing Group under Reller

5. Take NSN and create a Microsoft Infrastructure Division, and get Microsoft R&D involved to invent and innovate new telecommunications solutions that could be implemented globally. I know for a fact that MS R&D has some neat stuff that are of immense relevance to businesses and public sector institutions across the world, but especially the developing world. NSN has the industry footing to push those ideas to market.

 

[tgp]

Here's a thought.

1. Microsoft buys all of Nokia with Elop as CEO.

2. Microsoft then binds Nokia's HERE team with its Services Division and the mobile devices team with the Software Engineering and Hardware Engineering, where applicable.

3. Put Nokia people in charge of Software and Hardware, and (if need be) fire existing MS people in order to transition into a fast-acting entity

4. Put Nokia's marketing people in key positions within the MS Marketing Group under Reller

5. Take NSN and create a Microsoft Infrastructure Division, and get Microsoft R&D involved to invent and innovate new telecommunications solutions that could be implemented globally. I know for a fact that MS R&D has some neat stuff that are of immense relevance to businesses and public sector institutions across the world, but especially the developing world. NSN has the industry footing to push those ideas to market.

So in a nutshell replace Microsoft's current management with Nokia's management? Interesting concept!

 

[borasar]

I don't fully agree with you; granted the PE when he took over was quiet high, something around 42, but for example Adobe's around the same time was closer to 50.
If you look at the PE now MSFT is at 12 and Adobe is at 40. So yeah the PE was high but one of their comparatives faired better in terms of value than MSFT did. So there was a substantial amount of value to defend there if it was managed properly.

With regards to products Win7 was great so was the Xbox, but then you had Vista and now you have RT tablets that are a massive write down, and as much as I like WP8 the entire Windows Phone has been mismanaged for quiet some time and resulted in a lot of missed potential. If they moved early enough and executed they would have been a substantial competitor in that field already.

I agree that the company still has sound fundamentals, but under Balmer MS has really missed out and didn't execute on a number of opportunities which would have taken the company and its value much further.

Bombed products like Win7 and XBox/XBox 360? There were a few missteps, and no marketing worth mentioning, but by and large he's done a decent job. The stock price everyone likes to focus on is because it was overvalued when he took the job, not because the fundamentals of the business have gotten worse.

 

[Mio_WP]

Just use Nokia for all hardware stuff. Can't wait to see Bandit, and would buy a Nokia mouse in a heartbeat. For peripherals I am mostly relying on Logitech, but it is slowly getting worse. (take a 5 year old mouse or keyboard and compare with todays offerings) Nokia could do much better than that.

NSN is interesting, bold and (hopefully) smart move by Elop to buy out Siemens. If they can come up with a sort of network designed for mobile devices, just better than RIM's MDS. That would be staggering. I'm not talking license based like for BB, that would never fly. But something exclusively for Windows products. (thinking out loud.. Seamless "one screen integration", real push, etc)

Sent from my Lumia 920 using Tapatalk

 

[pwaikon]

My personal opinion about the subject is that Elop will stay with Nokia. I hope Microsoft doesn't ask him 'cos that could be too tempting to refuse. I've seen comments about that if Elop becomes the new CEO of Microsoft he'll take Nokia with him to MS. I'll say this: One man does not own a company. If Elop gets a new job, Nokia will end his contract and say bye bye to him, that's a fact. I have liked Elop as a Nokia's CEO but he does not own the company. If he wants to leave in the middle of Nokia's transition, he can but boy that would be ugly move from his part! :eck: I think he's a man enough to stay with Nokia.

I like the (slow but steady) progress that Nokia has been making with WP and I really don't want to think about what will happen to Nokia if Elop leaves and who will be the next CEO...

Stop. Just. Stop. :unhappysweat:

 

[Bob Shiska]

I don't fully agree with you; granted the PE when he took over was quiet high, something around 42, but for example Adobe's around the same time was closer to 50.
If you look at the PE now MSFT is at 12 and Adobe is at 40. So yeah the PE was high but one of their comparatives faired better in terms of value than MSFT did. So there was a substantial amount of value to defend there if it was managed properly.

With regards to products Win7 was great so was the Xbox, but then you had Vista and now you have RT tablets that are a massive write down, and as much as I like WP8 the entire Windows Phone has been mismanaged for quiet some time and resulted in a lot of missed potential. If they moved early enough and executed they would have been a substantial competitor in that field already.

I agree that the company still has sound fundamentals, but under Balmer MS has really missed out and didn't execute on a number of opportunities which would have taken the company and its value much further.

40 is growth stock territory, there's no way MSFT should've been there in 2000, and it's absurd that Adobe is there now. Flash is dying, and I can't see the Creative Suite range exploding that much more. Maybe some of their entireprise tools, I did some work with them on some business process management stuff and LiveCycle is fairly impressive. Apple's at 12 now too, it's where they should be.

Vista was, overall, a solid technical step whose introduction was botched, I classify it as a mixed bag. Much of the bad rep is based on, essentially, the min requirements being too low. There was no way MSFT should've ever let it be installed on 512MB RAM. Being rushed after they spent so much time on Longhorn didn't help, either, but Win7 isn't much more than UI tweaks to Vista. RT I look at more as a strategic play than a product in its own right, for now. They needed to port NT to ARM for WP anyways, and having RT provides a hedge against Intel getting legit hardware into the tablet space and will be more viable as more Metro apps get developed. It's a stepping stone, much like WP7 was. I don't think WP has been mismanaged as much as WinMo was, and that left them in a bind when they finally moved on. Had they responded immediately to the iPhone, it's a different story. WP7 I think was mostly about getting apps developed ahead of WP8 and testing the UI, along with simply stopping the bleeding and changing course. They just held onto WinMo way too long, so it's taken 5 years to recover to the point they're at now. Zune was great, just never had the marketing support it needed.

The best thing MSFT could do right now would be to say "screw it, we have a war chest. Let's use it to get a good beachhead in the mobile space." Add a thousand people on RT and WP, get WP to feature parity with Android and hurry up the merging of WP, RT, and 8, so that you submit one JIT compiled app and it works on all three. Don't even have to recompile. Undercut prices on tablets and phones until you hit 20% market share. Yeah, profits will tank for a couple years, but the company will be positioned for the future. That's essentially what commenters want. But you can't do that as a CEO or you'll get Fiorina'd (note that while she somehow still gets massively maligned as HP's CEO, even though she positioned them to be the #1 PC manufacturer and the attempted merger that finally got her ousted (EDS) went through a few years later anyways.) You have to wait until you're in troubled waters before you can innovate, or you lose your job.

Has he been a great CEO? No. But he also hasn't run the company into the ground. People are just focusing way more on the failures than the successes.

 

[borasar]

Fair assessment overall and for the most part I agree. But you can't deny that even your explanation shows that MS had good ideas and often horrendous execution. You said yourself Vista was solid, but intro was botched. WP is fine WiMO was mismanaged, Zune was great, just never had the marketing support needed. Those are all valid points, but the management of the company is responsible for the overall strategy not just product development; introduction, marketing, are just as important as development and design and that's where I feel Balmer was lacking. They would get a product going and then let it go.

It would take a very very big tool to run a company like MSFT into the ground, with its stranglehold on the PC market and a huge cash cow as a result.
I think overall we agree that he wasn't a great CEO, except you cut him slack for not running MSFT into the ground, where as I think given the amount of potential at MS, both in terms of technical and financial capabilities, he should have accomplished way way more.

40 is growth stock territory, there's no way MSFT should've been there in 2000, and it's absurd that Adobe is there now. Flash is dying, and I can't see the Creative Suite range exploding that much more. Maybe some of their entireprise tools, I did some work with them on some business process management stuff and LiveCycle is fairly impressive. Apple's at 12 now too, it's where they should be.

Vista was, overall, a solid technical step whose introduction was botched, I classify it as a mixed bag. Much of the bad rep is based on, essentially, the min requirements being too low. There was no way MSFT should've ever let it be installed on 512MB RAM. Being rushed after they spent so much time on Longhorn didn't help, either, but Win7 isn't much more than UI tweaks to Vista. RT I look at more as a strategic play than a product in its own right, for now. They needed to port NT to ARM for WP anyways, and having RT provides a hedge against Intel getting legit hardware into the tablet space and will be more viable as more Metro apps get developed. It's a stepping stone, much like WP7 was. I don't think WP has been mismanaged as much as WinMo was, and that left them in a bind when they finally moved on. Had they responded immediately to the iPhone, it's a different story. WP7 I think was mostly about getting apps developed ahead of WP8 and testing the UI, along with simply stopping the bleeding and changing course. They just held onto WinMo way too long, so it's taken 5 years to recover to the point they're at now. Zune was great, just never had the marketing support it needed.

The best thing MSFT could do right now would be to say "screw it, we have a war chest. Let's use it to get a good beachhead in the mobile space." Add a thousand people on RT and WP, get WP to feature parity with Android and hurry up the merging of WP, RT, and 8, so that you submit one JIT compiled app and it works on all three. Don't even have to recompile. Undercut prices on tablets and phones until you hit 20% market share. Yeah, profits will tank for a couple years, but the company will be positioned for the future. That's essentially what commenters want. But you can't do that as a CEO or you'll get Fiorina'd (note that while she somehow still gets massively maligned as HP's CEO, even though she positioned them to be the #1 PC manufacturer and the attempted merger that finally got her ousted (EDS) went through a few years later anyways.) You have to wait until you're in troubled waters before you can innovate, or you lose your job.

Has he been a great CEO? No. But he also hasn't run the company into the ground. People are just focusing way more on the failures than the successes.

 

[Reflexx]

Netscape, IBM, Compuserve, Prodigy, AOL, Commodore, Tandy, Atari, iomega, etc... show you that you can have popular consumer products/services and then become irrelevant in the consumer space very quickly.

And what about those awesomely popular productivity software. WordPerfect. Lotus 1-2-3. Corel Paint. All dominant back then.

It's hard to be dominant and then still be dominant decades later.