Nokia shows why it is a failing company.

[selfcreation]

You were the one who said lte and cdma chips cost more which if that is the case why is the iphone the same price on all carriers regardless of chip? Yeah a variety of things go into pricing it still doesn't change the fact that having choices for memory is always a good thing. But since one option is fine for you it must be fine for everyone.

they do cost more!(lte chips) not exactly sure how much more but more. lol

like i said in my other post.. ALLOT of factors go into pricing CELL PHONE ( smart or not )


**** i have REGULAR phones that are MORE expensive then NEW smartphones.. LOL riddle me that.....


now, if you actually read my post a phew page back..and notice how i said at some point that 8G even 16G would not be enough for me and even you and others...( i have 8G in apps/games alone!!!! )

but we are an exception to the rule and it would be ignorant on our part to assume the MAJORITY of the population wanted more , when in fact they dont

it might not be fine for you but it might be for the majority... ever think of that?

so u see a couple people complain and you assume that allot of people complain?

the web review/rents/blogs/forums only count for about 5%+iish of the people actually owning a Phone..... 80% of the client will never even say whats on their minds.....15% for non web.

80% of them might want mroe as well.. but maybe they cant pay does big prices .. or w/e their reason may be. hence making it easyer to attrack the people in does situations.( witch count for the majority)

Also keep in Mind .. NOKIA is not apple.... nokia cant make the 900 with 8g -16g-32g-64g
they have to change the Model NUmber each time and change other small things...

between you and me.. they DONT NEED to always change... but thats just the way it is... thats how they work.... thats how they grow....

regarding the Iphone its easy..... just works diffrently... they set THE *bar* and now they simply follow it.

as for the price , Apple decided and we had no choice.. apple products ( in my country in general ) we are not allowed to offer ANY service or deals... if a client calls to complain or repair the Iphone ...we have to tell them* call apple i cant help you**. and even the price, its the only phone we cant touch in term of price. ( back pocket offers)

they are THE HARDEST company to work with .... their way or the high way.... but they have a KILLER produt that sells, so they can do what they want.
they in essence set the *bar* for smartphones

 

[mprice86]

yeah .. what do you guys have 18months i think?? AMERICA in general ( canada and USA ) suck when it comes to price plans and contracts we are way more expensive then the rest of the world.

There's quite a lot of good options here.

We can do Pay and Go obviously, which usually will subsidise part of the phone cost up front, but the phone will usually be locked to the network you buy it on and you have to top up there and then as part of the cost.

Monthly rolling contract - this is a SIM only contract which lasts as long as you allow it to, or as little as one month and you can cancel with no notice. Usually very cheap, ?5 is cheapest, ?10-15 will cover most average users, but no handset. Good if you're visiting the UK, or if your contract runs out and you want to wait for a new handset.

1 year Contract - Much less popular now due to increased cost per month and upfront for the handset. Still perfectly fine for non-smartphone users.

2 year contract - More widely used now than 1 year contracts due to often significantly reduced costs per month and for handsets. More up to date handsets on offer on 2 year contracts, more variety too.

For example; I took a 2 year contract. ?33.50 per month, 500mins, Unlimited messages, 500mb internet and free access to BTOpenzone which is a UK wide WiFi service installed pretty much anywhere where people sit still for more than 5 mins; with all that I got the Lumia 800 free.

But if I was to take a 1 year contract instead I would likely be paying upwards of ?45 per month and ?200 up front for the phone. While it would be more appealing to not be locked in for 2 years, I can always buy a new handset myself and sell the old one on, or my carrier will pay me to recycle it with them.

Mobile networks is something that imo we've actually got right here in the UK. Obviously we don't have LTE and wont for at least 2 years, but given that the government is trying to focus on bringing broadband up to scratch first, that's understandable and it can wait.

The main thing here though is that the carriers are exactly what the phone and particularly the software manufacturers want them to be, big dumb pipes who provide a service, take the money and stay out of the way.

 

[nyc_rock]

If it made financial sense to offer 10 choices right away, we'd see 10 choices. If it made sense to see 2 choices right away, we'd see 2.

But right now, it makes financial sense (based on exhaustive market research) to offer one memory choice at launch for the Lumia 900.

Nokia isn't some tiny company that doesn't know what it's doing. They're not new to the business.

Where do you get this overwhelming faith in Nokia? If Nokia was such a brilliant company they would not be in the shape they are in.

 

[Reflexx]

Where do you get this overwhelming faith in Nokia? If Nokia was such a brilliant company they would not be in the shape they are in.

Shape they're in? You mean the top selling handset maker in the industry?

LoL

I suppose they should throw away all their market research and instead adopt a policy that doesn't make financial sense because it was advised by someone online that has never done it before.

 

[falconeight#IM]

When Cellphones first came out I had a nokia and that phone went on two army deployments and lasted 5 years. Nokia is quality like you will never know unless you have owned one.

 

[nyc_rock]

Shape they're in? You mean the top selling handset maker in the industry?

LoL

I suppose they should throw away all their market research and instead adopt a policy that doesn't make financial sense because it was advised by someone online that has never done it before.

I dont have the time to give you a financial overview of Nokia. But if you do a little research I am sure you will see that they are in tough shape financially.

 

[nyc_rock]

When Cellphones first came out I had a nokia and that phone went on two army deployments and lasted 5 years. Nokia is quality like you will never know unless you have owned one.

My favorite phone of all time was a nokia. I forget the model number but it was one of those tiny plastic numbers. I also had the all silver model with the cover over the numbers. That thing was sweet.

Nokia lost thier way when they failed to keep symbian relevent. Very similar to Blackberry without the Corporate loyalty.

 

[Reflexx]

My favorite phone of all time was a nokia. I forget the model number but it was one of those tiny plastic numbers. I also had the all silver model with the cover over the numbers. That thing was sweet.

Nokia lost thier way when they failed to keep symbian relevent. Very similar to Blackberry without the Corporate loyalty.

Wait... Symbian? That's your strategy? Holding on to Symbian too long is one of the reasons Nokia WAS failing. Thank goodness they have righted the ship.

BTW, here's a nice article about predicting Nokia's success. http://www.neowin.net/news/nokia-is-back-and-ready-to-kick-some-***?utm_source=twitterfeed

 

[JedH]

Wait I thought no 32gb phone meant they were failing? Now you're listing everything else.

Nokia was going down the drain when Elop stepped, and there was no way they couldn't have competed with Google and Apple on their own.

Despite the selective articles you choose, Nokia is doing better. They are increasing awareness and pushing new phones that actually now compete with the other major smart phones. Depending on the stats you wish to use they are either succeeding or failling.

So what was Nokia doing before Microsoft came? I don't think they were in a better position.

Fact is no company just becomes successful again instantly and it takes time to rebuild and get momentum going again.

There's really no scenario for Nokia that wouldn't get Nokia falsely criticized by you, cause let's face it, haters want to hate.

 

[falconeight#IM]

My favorite phone of all time was a nokia. I forget the model number but it was one of those tiny plastic numbers. I also had the all silver model with the cover over the numbers. That thing was sweet.

Nokia lost thier way when they failed to keep symbian relevent. Very similar to Blackberry without the Corporate loyalty.

Sometimes I get teary eyed thinking about the old girl and her pull out antenna.

 

[jfa1]

My favorite phone of all time was a nokia. I forget the model number but it was one of those tiny plastic numbers. I also had the all silver model with the cover over the numbers. That thing was sweet.

Nokia lost thier way when they failed to keep symbian relevent. Very similar to Blackberry without the Corporate loyalty.

Not to mention the saga of Palm and HPalm and HP!

 

[jfa1]

Garment you are entitled to your opinion and analysis of Nokia. You may be right and you may be wrong only time will tell. Most of his prefer to remain optimistic of the future of WP, Microsoft and Nokia. I am one of the later group and will continue to be.

 

[bentheoandrews]

There's been an awful lot said here already and have tried reading everything but may have missed it so sorry if I'm repeating any points.....

Firstly, specs. Apple is a great example of a company that hasn't put the highest spec and latest tech in their products - remember the first iPhone that didn't even have 3G. Look at their success. It's about making something that people want to use and can use easily without needing a computer science degree. Which brings me on to my second point....
OS - I'm no expert but I like my tech kit. I like stuff to just work - which is another area the iPhone excelled in. It may not do everything but what it does do, it does well. Much like WP7. It's slick, attractive, not too fussy and works without having to stress too much about settings and guff like that. Symbian on the other hand (for an enthusiast like me rather than a programming genius) was slow, bloated and confusing. I remember my dad having a Symbian Nokia as an ill advised upgrade and both of us tore our hair out just trying to set the thing up. Nokia jumping in with WP7 was a great move - its much better to be with a young OS on its way into the market than an old tired one on its way out.
Desirability is another massive factor in success in the phone market. Again, look at the iPhone. Nokia have pulled a blinder with the Lumia series. I don't know of any other phone since the iPhone that has been so heavily covered in the press (in the UK at least) for all the right reasons. I've recently swapped my iPhone for a cyan 800 because it's the first phone I've truly been excited about since my 8210 way back in the day (best looking phone ever).
Lumias are the phones both Microsoft and Nokia need. Yes Nokia is still a highly successful feature phone maker but it has been losing the smartphone battle for some time. With the 900 picking up so many awards at CES, it's pretty clear to see that spending a bit more developing a frickin hot looking phone with good specs is going to turn more heads than a phone that looks like every other phone with crazy "trophy" specs - Titan II and your 16MP camera, I'm looking at you.
I hope this hasn't offended anyone but I think with the Lumia range, Nokia shows why it isn't going to be a failing company much longer.

 

[TheWeeBear]

Thanks for your very positive sounding contribution, and welcome along to WPCentral bentheoandrews.

 

[Premium1]

There's been an awful lot said here already and have tried reading everything but may have missed it so sorry if I'm repeating any points.....

Firstly, specs. Apple is a great example of a company that hasn't put the highest spec and latest tech in their products - remember the first iPhone that didn't even have 3G. Look at their success. It's about making something that people want to use and can use easily without needing a computer science degree. Which brings me on to my second point....
OS - I'm no expert but I like my tech kit. I like stuff to just work - which is another area the iPhone excelled in. It may not do everything but what it does do, it does well. Much like WP7. It's slick, attractive, not too fussy and works without having to stress too much about settings and guff like that. Symbian on the other hand (for an enthusiast like me rather than a programming genius) was slow, bloated and confusing. I remember my dad having a Symbian Nokia as an ill advised upgrade and both of us tore our hair out just trying to set the thing up. Nokia jumping in with WP7 was a great move - its much better to be with a young OS on its way into the market than an old tired one on its way out.
Desirability is another massive factor in success in the phone market. Again, look at the iPhone. Nokia have pulled a blinder with the Lumia series. I don't know of any other phone since the iPhone that has been so heavily covered in the press (in the UK at least) for all the right reasons. I've recently swapped my iPhone for a cyan 800 because it's the first phone I've truly been excited about since my 8210 way back in the day (best looking phone ever).
Lumias are the phones both Microsoft and Nokia need. Yes Nokia is still a highly successful feature phone maker but it has been losing the smartphone battle for some time. With the 900 picking up so many awards at CES, it's pretty clear to see that spending a bit more developing a frickin hot looking phone with good specs is going to turn more heads than a phone that looks like every other phone with crazy "trophy" specs - Titan II and your 16MP camera, I'm looking at you.
I hope this hasn't offended anyone but I think with the Lumia range, Nokia shows why it isn't going to be a failing company much longer.

You also have to remember when the original iphone first launched there was no competition and it stayed that way up until about last year that the iphone had the strangle hold on the smart phone market. I mean just look at the backlash apple got for awhile for keeping the same design with the 4s as the 4. I think the times are changing and nokia doesn't need top of the line specs but with what specs they are putting into it, it is still behind the year old android and iphones. It will be interesting to see how the 900 does on at&t at first and if more people begin to start gravitating towards wp. Not to mention I think Nokia should really pressure verizon to get more of their devices on big red. I mean the largest carrier in the US could help boost sales of Nokia's phones and give them some sort of exclusive even if it is just a red color or something. The more carriers that have nokia's the better.

 

[Reflexx]

As bentheoandrews pretty much said, when all is said and done, it looks like it's "glass full" vs "glass empty" people.

Two different ways of looking at the same information.

 

[selfcreation]

You also have to remember when the original iphone first launched there was no competition and it stayed that way up until about last year that the iphone had the strangle hold on the smart phone market.

no competition when the first Iphone came out??!?! lol...your kidding right?


how bout WM (windows mobile ), RIM (blackberry) and lets not forget PALM!!! the once who started it all with the Palm pilots!!!

all came out YEARS before apple....

the ONLY reason apple sold so much was because of the transaction between the IPOD to Iphone. and it offered the first user friendly multimedia device. ( like a PC for dummy's)

if WM dint require you to push the *X* to close the apps and only had 1 button with NO folders... it probly would of sold just as much as the iphones. lol.

 

[Reflexx]

Yeah. The whole iPod thing was huge for the iPhone.

Apple was pretty much a dominant (pretty much monopoly-level) player in the digital music market. They used that market and leveraged it to gain a competitive advantage in a different market.

If they were treated the same way that MS was at the time, the government would have required them to remove the iTunes requirement from the iPhone. It would have been separated from the OS and the government would have required that Apple allow any music service to be installed on there. But that didn't happen to Apple, so they were able to use their monopoly power in one market to help them dominate another market.

And unfortunately, Palm was a casualty. Palm pretty much created the category too.

 

[Premium1]

no competition when the first Iphone came out??!?! lol...your kidding right?


how bout WM (windows mobile ), RIM (blackberry) and lets not forget PALM!!! the once who started it all with the Palm pilots!!!

all came out YEARS before apple....

the ONLY reason apple sold so much was because of the transaction between the IPOD to Iphone. and it offered the first user friendly multimedia device. ( like a PC for dummy's)

if WM dint require you to push the *X* to close the apps and only had 1 button with NO folders... it probly would of sold just as much as the iphones. lol.

Those were out years before yes but were not "competition" for the iphone. Before the iphone the smartphones were nothing like what we see today. The iphone got things going and if those others were such competitors to the iphone then why did none of those really have anything to combat the iphone? The iphone was on a completely different level when it first came out and made smart phones easier and more simple to use.

 

[selfcreation]

Those were out years before yes but were not "competition" for the iphone. Before the iphone the smartphones were nothing like what we see today. The iphone got things going and if those others were such competitors to the iphone then why did none of those really have anything to combat the iphone? The iphone was on a completely different level when it first came out and made smart phones easier and more simple to use.

dude seriously man..... were not in competition??? i cant find a polite way to tell you how wrong you are...... Every thing you have said so far has been an assumption

WM5.0 , was more advance then the first Iphone and did 10000million more things... hows is that not a competitor? PALMS and WM where the first multimedia phones that offered everything into 1. (music , game, office , productivity , ect.. )

apple just took the already FAMOUS Ipod and simply added an antenna. WHOAA WATCH OUT!!.. ahhahahahaha and misinformed people assume they were the first to do it. lol.

then the second generation Iphone came out and copied all the other services other Smartphones where ALREADY offering.... ( office tools and what not ) and the same people keep following

there is a saying... ** you could put a * I * in front of a piece of sh*T and it would still sell. I****

seriously i could write a 50page post and give you the million reasons if you want ( **** i study in this stuff )

Winning guy`s post right above yours also gives a good logical explanation to Apple.