The Windows 10 April 2018 update has arrived! Get the new Dell XPS 15, starting at $999.99
05-31-2012 06:12 PM
75 123
tools
  1. tekhna's Avatar
    Agreed.

    Another OS transition would finish them. They have to stick with Windows Phone.

    If they announced in a year that they were going to Android, it would signal the beginning of the end of Nokia, guaranteed. They would hang on for a while, but you would see a steady decline that would not end until the company toppled.
    They don't have to. They could sell both phones. And it's totally clear the carriers think Nokia+Android would have been a runaway success.
    04-23-2012 10:39 AM
  2. based_graham's Avatar
    Good thing Nokia went with WP. I can see them failing if they went with Meego. There is no way Nokia can make a big drastic push with Meego like how they are pushing L900's right now.

    If Nokia went with Android people will overlook the platform. Samsung and HTC own the Android domain Nokia would of been just another vendor.

    With WP they stand out as a different operating system, different lifestyle, different ecosystem. Hopefully they take advantage of the entire MS ecosystem and become the #1 Windows OEM for everything.
    04-23-2012 11:09 AM
  3. smoledman's Avatar
    They don't have to. They could sell both phones. And it's totally clear the carriers think Nokia+Android would have been a runaway success.
    I fail to see the point of them getting into Android with Samsung and HTC so strong. The opportunity here is the fact that Samsung/HTC designs for WP are so half-hearted.
    04-23-2012 11:21 AM
  4. sentimentGX4's Avatar
    They don't have to. They could sell both phones. And it's totally clear the carriers think Nokia+Android would have been a runaway success.
    Nokia isn't exactly an expert at making decently spec'ed phones. If not for the fact that Windows Phone has standardized chipsets, the mask would fall off and expose Nokia's flaws. Nokia was the company with the worst spec'ed! Even behind RIM and Palm (before it was bought out).

    Phones like the N8 and the C7 are the devices you expect from Nokia. (Not only slow but bulky and small display). Slap Android on top of those and you have a Nokia Android. There is no way Nokia could have ever succeeded in Android. You need a competent company to compete in the cutthroat Android market and Nokia isn't halfway competent enough to reel out decent Windows Phones device, tbh.

    If not for extensive marketing, even Nokia WPs would be nothing but thick phones with small, outdated displays.

    I fail to see the point of them getting into Android with Samsung and HTC so strong. The opportunity here is the fact that Samsung/HTC designs for WP are so half-hearted.
    That's another important issue. Companies such as Samsung are designing their own snappy chipsets and I have no faith Nokia could handle that given its mess in Symbian.
    04-23-2012 11:39 AM
  5. MattLFC's Avatar
    Nokia never went with Android, because of a few reasons imho...

    - Most importantly, Android (especially in the Froyo days when they chose WP) is a messy OS, even more fragmented than Symbian became. It is clunky, geeky, and has about as much simplicity to the average consumer, as the workings of an internal combustion engine. Nokia wanted a simple, closed, reliable, and standardised OS, anything less does not suit their customer-base.

    - Microsoft will do just about anything they can to ensure that WP is a success, and like it or not, they are in the game for the long-haul, and will not only use their own expertise and resources to develop the best OS ever, but they will also invest freely in the platform. The future of Android is less certain, due to it being open-source, and the development to make it the best OS ever, will never be so much of a priority.

    - Nokia maybe had the forsight/an idea, to consider that Google were circling Motorola, or at least aiming for some takeover of a hardware vendor in the future. The takeover of Motorola by Google, has imho, ended any chance completely, that Nokia may be interested in utilising the OS someday. Nokia know/knew Microsoft are a software company, and have little intention/interest in making hardware (Xbox aside). They always use 3rd party companies to build their phones, and simply create the core-software (WinMo devices, KIN, WP7 upon release etc).

    - It's likely that Nokia got a better/preferential deal from Microsoft, maybe with cash for marketing, preferential treatment, lower license costs etc... Android and Google would likely never offer such perks.

    - Also, for those who consider Android to be some glorified cash-cow or something - take notice of how successful it has been for Sony/Sony Ericsson.
    NokiaBeast likes this.
    04-23-2012 08:30 PM
  6. Laura Knotek's Avatar
    Nokia isn't exactly an expert at making decently spec'ed phones. If not for the fact that Windows Phone has standardized chipsets, the mask would fall off and expose Nokia's flaws. Nokia was the company with the worst spec'ed! Even behind RIM and Palm (before it was bought out).
    I wouldn't say the 808 is lacking in hardware, especially not the camera. Nokia Europe - Nokia 808 PureView with 41 MP camera
    04-23-2012 08:37 PM
  7. MattLFC's Avatar
    I agree Nokia have always been behind with technology, I used to hate Nokia's because when they had their expensive 3210 and 3310 handsets, I had Trium (Mitsubishi), Siemens, Panasonic and Motorla handsets, which cost less, and came with allsorts of features and technologies not present on the competing Nokia handsets, such as WAP, colour screens (psuedo ftw lol), MP3 players etc...

    However, one of the reasons Nokia have enjoyed such a (generally) good reputation within the industry for many many years, is because they choose not to use "bleeding edge" technologies, preferring rather to use mature and reliable platforms instead, which most consumers prefer (they don't have a clue about all these new technologies, and just want a device that works). Looking back, I have to admit that none of the bleeding edge features in other handsets were really ready for production/consumer use in these handsets (ahead of their time), and Nokia probably took the correct route, which led to them outselling everyone else, by a HUGE margin.

    Hence, I harp back to the point in my post, Android does not suit what Nokia is all about, reliability and quality. Android offers neither, hence WP and Nokia is the perfect marriage. It's just a shame it took so long for the fusion to happen, Nokia lost their way with Symbian, and tried to break the mould by releasing handsets based upon less mature platforms, and it (quite rightly) backfired on them. Had Nokia and WP7.5 wedded 3 years ago, I have a feeling Android and iOS may still be playing catch-up with their marketshare.

    Thay have a mountain to climb, but they at least have a good quality and solid road and Land Rover to do it. Nobody said it was going to be easy, and Nokia will know better than anyone how tough the task will be. It's quite possibly more a case of endurance rather than being able to achieve it; they can do it, they just need to keep up the momentum.

    And don't expect them to be outselling the iPhone or Android marketshare as a sign of success - their 5-year target will be far lower than this.
    NokiaBeast likes this.
    04-23-2012 08:49 PM
  8. Major's Avatar
    By all accounts in the early going, the Lumia 900 launch has been a success. Reports of Nokia's demise just might be greatly exaggerated.
    04-23-2012 09:18 PM
  9. N8ter's Avatar
    WHITNEY TILSON: These Three Companies Are In 'Full Scale Collapse' - Business Insider

    He also mentions RIM. We all can pretty much say that we know RIM is (they obviously have no direction & no future), but IMO Nokia is a toss up. What do you guys think?
    RIM is actually in a bit of a better position than Nokia, so I don't know how you can say RIM is, but Nokia isn't.

    RIM has a new OS coming out later this year. They have numerous gov't contracts and their phones are very popular in other markets. They're certainly not as strong as they haven't been, but they aren't failing on the level of Nokia at the moment. They are still actually profitable, while Nokia is bleeding money.
    04-23-2012 09:49 PM
  10. peestandingup's Avatar
    By all accounts in the early going, the Lumia 900 launch has been a success. Reports of Nokia's demise just might be greatly exaggerated.
    They just got downgraded to "junk status". Fitch downgrades Nokia’s debt rating to junk after first-quarter losses - The Washington Post
    04-24-2012 08:56 AM
  11. tekhna's Avatar
    I asked over in off topic who, if anyone, actually owned Nokia stock, and it's been crickets.
    04-24-2012 09:47 AM
  12. oldpueblo's Avatar
    Time to buy. :)
    willied likes this.
    04-24-2012 10:25 AM
  13. simonnyc's Avatar
    I asked over in off topic who, if anyone, actually owned Nokia stock, and it's been crickets.
    I picked up 200 shares of NOK last week at 3.90/share. Trade isn't working out for me yet but i bought it for the longer term (at least a year) before I sell.

    Stock is flat today after the most recent downgrade so it looks like most of the bad news is now priced in. Buy buy buy!
    04-24-2012 10:32 AM
  14. sting7k's Avatar
    Nokia's future is highly dependent on hanging onto what is left of their marketshare in emerging markets and growing that.

    This is why they are putting so much effort into Tango and the Lumia 610. The Lumia 610 and future lower spec Nokia WP phones are just as important to Nokia's survival as the success of the higher end stuff.

    Nokia enjoyed a strong position worldwide for years with their feature phones, and their high-end feature phones (lower end Symbian devices) but the avalanche of cheap asian Android phones has crushed them in that segment and they are scrambling to get out from under. This is key.

    Nokia has GOT to get some $100-125 (no contract price) Lumia's with Tango on them out in China, India and southeast Asia ASAP. They need to promote the crap out of them too, just like the Lumia 900 was promoted here. Android is eating their lunch there and far faster than they ever anticipated. Symbian and Meego are not going to save them there. If they can position WP7 phones as a desirable option in those markets, then they will be able to staunch the bleeding and begin to climb back up.

    That part of their strategy is every bit as important as what they do here in the U.S.
    There are already more Android activations and iPhones being sold in China than in the U.S.

    It's easy to think we are the center of the universe here and complain that Microsoft and Nokia aren't giving us everything we want the minute we want it. Just remember, at the same time they are working on Apollo and stuff for us, they also need to be getting the Lumia 610 and other phones ready for these equally important market. It's also just as important for them to get popular Chinese language WP7 apps developed as it is to get Words with Friends or whatever your pet missing app is.

    They've got their work cut out for them. :blush:
    Exactly right. There are maybe 1-1.5 billion people that can buy a high end phone. So that leaves around 6 billion for low end phones.

    All these companies have the same goal. Relatively few people can afford a computer. But mobile phones are far cheaper. They want to get one into as many hands around the globe as possible.

    Nokia is right to put effort into the low end phones. In many many places around the world people cannot afford even the iPhone 3GS or iPhone 4. But they can afford a Lumia 610. Or right now the BB curves and low end Android models.

    Last quarter 78% of the smart phones AT&T sold were iPhones. That isn't something Microsoft or Nokia can crack easily and will take a lot of time. But other markets are much easier.
    04-24-2012 10:45 AM
  15. DungMasterFang's Avatar
    I agree Nokia have always been behind with technology, I used to hate Nokia's because when they had their expensive 3210 and 3310 handsets, I had Trium (Mitsubishi), Siemens, Panasonic and Motorla handsets, which cost less, and came with allsorts of features and technologies not present on the competing Nokia handsets, such as WAP, colour screens (psuedo ftw lol), MP3 players etc...
    That's bull. Nokia was the synonym for innovation for a couple of decades.
    04-24-2012 11:41 AM
  16. tekhna's Avatar
    Exactly right. There are maybe 1-1.5 billion people that can buy a high end phone. So that leaves around 6 billion for low end phones.

    All these companies have the same goal. Relatively few people can afford a computer. But mobile phones are far cheaper. They want to get one into as many hands around the globe as possible.

    Nokia is right to put effort into the low end phones. In many many places around the world people cannot afford even the iPhone 3GS or iPhone 4. But they can afford a Lumia 610. Or right now the BB curves and low end Android models.

    Last quarter 78% of the smart phones AT&T sold were iPhones. That isn't something Microsoft or Nokia can crack easily and will take a lot of time. But other markets are much easier.

    But Nokia is losing the low-end market. Their low-end phone sales are absolutely tanking.
    04-24-2012 11:56 AM
  17. trazer's Avatar
    I think they'll be ok if things continue and they can offer WP8 upgrades and such. If customers are screwed out of updating by MS yet again, they will be virtually starting over in the market yet again and then they are doomed.

    You can't burn all the early adopters and hope to survive for round two, not when they are in the state they are now anyway!

    Still hoping for the best personally.
    04-24-2012 12:06 PM
  18. MattLFC's Avatar
    That's bull. Nokia was the synonym for innovation for a couple of decades.
    Are we talking pre-90's here? Sorry, but that's like saying Nokia lead the way in boots and tyres. Completely irrelevant in the modern world.

    Nokia we're always late to market with the latest mobile technological innovations throughout the 90's and 00's. However, this was one of the reasons they did so well, and built up a reputation like they did, they only used mature technologies; they may not have been first to the party, but by the time they arrived, they were always the best. Others who were first (Siemens had a huge run of world-firsts in the late 90's/early 00's) tended to find their technologies were unstable, unreliable, and at worst, incompatible once standardisation of the technology hit-in (the Siemens S25i with its psuedo-colour screen and WAP 1.0, which was incompatible once 1.1 came out etc).

    The companies that pushed the boundaries, with bleeding-edge technology, generally fell (Siemens, Motorola, Mitsubishi, Panasonic, Sharp) in the mobile industry, whereas Nokia outsold, and outlived them all.
    Last edited by MattLFC; 04-24-2012 at 12:26 PM.
    04-24-2012 12:20 PM
  19. texantony's Avatar
    Nokia is actually on the positive side most of today. I've been buying shares everytime it drops. 95% of the time my gut feeling is correct. Let's hope NOK doesn't fall in the 5% :-)

    I remember late last year every other analyst was putting down bank of America and look what happen in march.

    Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express
    04-24-2012 12:26 PM
  20. erzhik's Avatar
    Nokia is not going to collapse. People been saying that for years and they are still here and still one of the biggest (if not the biggest) manufacturer of phones. I never trust analysts because all they do all day is analyze meaningless statistics and throwing their GUESSES to us. Because every analyst expects manufacturers to sell same amount of units as Apple, if they don't than that company fails in analysts eyes.

    And please tell me when was the last time that an analyst was right?
    04-24-2012 04:20 PM
  21. rich4A1's Avatar
    I asked over in off topic who, if anyone, actually owned Nokia stock, and it's been crickets.
    I do....
    04-24-2012 08:35 PM
  22. N8ter's Avatar
    Nokia is actually on the positive side most of today. I've been buying shares everytime it drops. 95% of the time my gut feeling is correct. Let's hope NOK doesn't fall in the 5% :-)

    I remember late last year every other analyst was putting down bank of America and look what happen in march.

    Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express
    Love when people come to forums acting like they're stockbrokers. See that alot on Crackberry.com too. Always tickles me :P

    And Bank of America is not comparable to Nokia.
    04-25-2012 03:02 AM
  23. N8ter's Avatar
    Nokia isn't exactly an expert at making decently spec'ed phones. If not for the fact that Windows Phone has standardized chipsets, the mask would fall off and expose Nokia's flaws. Nokia was the company with the worst spec'ed! Even behind RIM and Palm (before it was bought out).

    Phones like the N8 and the C7 are the devices you expect from Nokia. (Not only slow but bulky and small display). Slap Android on top of those and you have a Nokia Android. There is no way Nokia could have ever succeeded in Android. You need a competent company to compete in the cutthroat Android market and Nokia isn't halfway competent enough to reel out decent Windows Phones device, tbh.

    If not for extensive marketing, even Nokia WPs would be nothing but thick phones with small, outdated displays.

    That's another important issue. Companies such as Samsung are designing their own snappy chipsets and I have no faith Nokia could handle that given its mess in Symbian.
    Nokia could have made better Symbian devices, and without the hardware limitations they certainly could have made 1st class Android devices.

    I bet a main reason why they took up Microsoft was the money and the fact that microsoft was willing to give them a competitive advantage over the other OEMs. That's something they could not have had with Android. They would have had to "try harder" to compete in that market and they didn't want to put in the work/investment all by themselves.

    Personally, they'd have been served better by going a hybrid route and targetting multiple platforms (i.e. release a high end WP7, Android, Meego device) and see how they all compared to each other with similar builds.

    The WP hardware specs exist to help Nokia, cause if HTC/Samsung could utilize their better Android assets/specs they'd be blowing Nokia away right now in the WP7 hardware ecosystem.
    04-25-2012 03:12 AM
  24. jabtano's Avatar
    Now then I advise you buy Nokia stock currently $3.67 per share if you are looking for something that in 12-24 mo. time this stock could be in the upper $15-18 per looking at Lumia sales numbers and what a Nokia tablet could bring and also what the sales will be like in the Asian market. One must think back that Apple at one point was $7.00 per share and I also advised a buy ..buy for the long term.the same with Nokia this is a very strong compnay with a cash fund of over 7 billion US./ that is not debt that is actual cash in the bank. so before you call Nokia dead do some homework. we have some new devices coming out from Nokia along with a Nokia win8 tablet soon. I see this as a strong company in transition..
    04-25-2012 05:46 AM
  25. texantony's Avatar
    Love when people come to forums acting like they're stockbrokers. See that alot on Crackberry.com too. Always tickles me :P

    And Bank of America is not comparable to Nokia.
    Not comparing Bank of America to Nokia. Comparing the analysts.

    Another winning day for me with Nok in the market. Now, back to bed. LOL
    04-25-2012 09:13 AM
75 123
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD