5 ms·

Well, I suppose you don't always do the smartest thing when you're standing on a burning platform.

by tc 16y ago

barista 16y ago
But he question is: Is this smarter than peeing your pants to stay warm :)
- rbanffy 16y ago
  It's more like setting the platform on fire to stay warm. oh... wait...
wsf 16y ago
What choice does Nokia has? 1. Choose Android and be delegated to one of the hardware supplier amongst HTC, Samsung etc (not necessary the preferred one). 2. Stick with Symbian, Meego and be slower and further down road (Users don't care about the OS. Just whether it works. I would argue that developing OS internally is just playing catching up with minimal hope of overtaking the others significantly) 3. Try Microsoft and hopes the strengths compliment one another (not-too-bad windows phone 7). I don't envy Nokia. It's a tough choice. Effectively, they are trying to move into a field just disrupted by Apple and competing on a sustaining basis. Doesn't bode well but what other alternatives do they have?
- davidw 16y ago
  With MS, they'll be "one hardware supplier amongst many", but with less leverage and freedom to make the platform theirs than with Android.
  - bodyfour 16y ago
    Do we know enough about the terms of the partnership to know that? MS is certainly capable of screwing over their existing hardware partners (see also: PlaysForSure) My hunch is that Nokia wouldn't have gone for the deal if they're just going to be another mere supplier.
    - davidw 16y ago
      Sure, they might get some perks, but I just don't see MS having it in them to really give them a long leash.
    - rbanffy 16y ago
      My impression is that nobody but an ex-Microsoft employee would even consider such idea. This partnership benefits Microsoft's executives in the mobile division, who will have their vindication in a major phone maker going with their platform instead of Android. Their bonuses will be outlandish this year. It hardly benefits Nokia, who is betting the company on an unknown platform nobody else is betting on. A friend of mine usually said that when you see two lines in the bank, one being much shorter than the other, you can bet the short one is the wrong line for you.
      - aphexairlines 16y ago
        Not just an ex-MS employee -- the former head of Office (and the rest of the business division) who might still hold a truckload of MS stock.
        rbanffy 16y ago
        I don't think he would be allowed to have Microsoft stock while running a company that competes with Microsoft on some fronts. Well.. Stranger things have happened.
        Splines 16y ago
        Elop's time at MS was quite short. IMO, he couldn't fill Sinofsky's shoes.
        aphexairlines 16y ago
        Implying that he did a bad job at MS doesn't sound plausible since he was offered a CEO position in another megacorp.
  - detst 16y ago
    Right, and even if they get a sweet deal from Microsoft, they are still betting on an unknown with much of their success dependent on Microsoft. In Android, they'd build on a known platform with success or failure in their own hands. Don't like what Google is doing in the future? They'd have options without abandoning the platform. Hell, they could let Google develop the core, port Qt, use Bing maps and search, and Amazon Appstore.
- mbreese 16y ago
  Has anyone ever come out of a Microsoft partnership stronger? I agree, though that this something that is only done by a desperate company with few choices.
  - philwelch 16y ago
    Intel.
  - seertaak 16y ago
    IIRC Microsoft invested in Apple at their low point, and also agreed to continue to support their Office suite on Apple computers. I would call that a partnership.
    - mbreese 16y ago
      Yeah, others mentioned this lower in the thread. I'm not so sure that this would be a good example of a partnership, because Microsoft didn't really get much from Apple. Apple got back some legitimacy as a platform. I remember betting at the time that they'd be out of business before 2000 (this was before the return of Jobs). Microsoft gave them the ability to say, we're going to be around for a while, and our customers are going to be able to get work done. What Microsoft gained (aside from a good return on investment) was something that they could point to when negotiating with the DOJ. A strong Apple was absolutely required for Microsoft to remain intact. So what Microsoft really got wasn't a partner, but a competitor.
      - krevis 16y ago
        There was a bit more to it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Canyon_Company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Canyon_Company Microsoft also got a patent cross-licensing deal with Apple, IE shipping as the default browser on Macs (a blow against Netscape), and a settlement on some messy lawsuits. (I imagine a lot of lawyers got paid, too... what a mess!)
      - seertaak 16y ago
        > What Microsoft gained (aside from a good return on investment) was something that they could point to when negotiating with the DOJ. A strong Apple was absolutely required for Microsoft to remain intact. So what Microsoft really got wasn't a partner, but a competitor. Yeah, it was a sort of cynical "partnership". I think your analysis is bang-on.
- bodyfour 16y ago
  I basically agree. Look at the deal from MSFT's perspective: 1. They are desperate to get (back) into the mobile OS market. For a company that is built on OS dominance this is an existential crisis... much more than Google Search ever could be. 2. Everything they have tried so far has failed, badly. How many W7 phones have you seen in the wild? 3. Hooking up with partner like Nokia (remember: still the largest phone manufacturer, albeit mostly not smartphones) is probably the only credible move MSFT can make that may reverse this. This implies that the deal probably is costing MSFT dearly. They needed Nokia, and Nokia knew it. Remember: Microsoft still has more money than god. We've seen with Xbox that they're willing to use that cash to muscle into markets with entrenched players. If they want it bad enough they can be a force... imagine if they subsidize the hardware enough to make the phones almost free, buy several of the top indie iOS developers, and buy a pact with companies like EA to make new titles W7 exclusive at launch. There's no reason to think they'll WIN.. after all, Apple and Google are hardly paupers. I'm just saying that it could get real interesting. Or maybe it won't. MSFT might continue to make no headway in the market and Nokia will just end up going down the tubes.
  - brc 16y ago
    Don't forget MS still controls an army of developers, and is mobilising a lot of resources to help transfer skills from winforms/asp.net to win 7 mobile development. There will be plenty of apps development for w7 as long as the platform can reach some type of critical mass.
- torpor 16y ago
  They could make their Meego-based phones incredibly easy - and fun - to develop for! They could attract developers by doing the one thing that nobody else wants to do: ship the phones with the compiler onboard! :) This would disrupt things immensely - imagine if, all you had to do to build an app for your phone, was connect to it over a web browser, or so on ..
- kingsley_20 16y ago
  HTC is differentiating quite nicely within the Android ecosystem on the UX layer.
  - Splines 16y ago
    Their exchange client is awesome (at least, I think it's owned by HTC). I could do without the extra widgety stuff.
- Ruudjah 16y ago
  Android is for a large deal open source. That would enable Nokia to continue their Meego strategy, along with Qt. They don't need to develop the API and core sets, but can focus on the apps (higher level). That means either laying off a whole bunch of devvers, or moving them to app development. Also, linux can use some decent developed UI toolkits. Nokia easily can cut a deal with Google for Android store revenue sharing. Especially if Microsoft is in the market, too for alliance candidates. Choosing Android makes actually quite a lot of sense to me, from a Nokia POV.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- aik 16y ago
  I think an important point is also that Nokia isn't abandoning MeeGo and their own OSes. Those I imagine will play a significant role in the future (again).
  - Geee 16y ago
    Well you are wrong.. They abandoned them. MeeGo is cut down to be experimental side project, probably to not piss Intel and other partners off.
    - aik 16y ago
      Hold on. Nokia does a ridiculous amount of research into cell phone technology. I agree it's a side project now, but do you think they seriously are "abandoning" it? Where have you heard that? I don't think Nokia would completely throw away that much good work...
      - Geee 16y ago
        They are not and will not be pushing it as their primary platform. It will remain as a research project as it has been. In my book that means abandoning; there won't be any "ecosystem" for it.
- stuaxo 16y ago
  Or... Maemo was working, just punt phones out the door running that (with capacitive touchscreens).
- shareme 16y ago
  ahem Sony Ericsson had one of the worse positions among all OEMs and they managed to do it..
jquery 16y ago
Am i the only person here who finds this really exciting?Windows 7 is probably the best piece of software I have ever used, and yes I have a MacBook pro and an iPhone so I'm not some fanboy. So the world's best OS is about to be put on some of the best mobile hardware available, with two juggernaut companies putting their very survival on the line. I am so glad the market is getting shaken up like this, no matter what happens the consumers will be the ultimate winners of such brutal competition. Android can no longer coast on being the only good alternative to iOS.
- vegai 16y ago
  Windows 7 isn't Windows Mobile 7, is it? The latter has been a full rewrite, so in many ways, it's completely different from everything else they have. Not that it couldn't be good, just that you cannot automatically think that it is from Windows 7's qualities.
  - jquery 16y ago
    I didn't know that, but in no way does it really dampen my enthusiasm. To me, Win7 proved Microsoft was still King of OS's, so I can't wait to see their upcoming flagship mobile product. I am sure they will take the lessons of Android and iOS to heart with the first major launch of this partnership. This is a huge opportunity for both companies to take the mobile world by storm. Color me disappointed if this fails, but I think it has more potential to shake up the industry than anything else announced so far thus year.
    - rbanffy 16y ago
      > Win7 proved Microsoft was still King of OS's, No fanboy, you say...
      - Stormbringer 16y ago
        Say what you like, but up until the XBox ring of death debacle Microsoft made really good hardware.

Well, I suppose you don't always do the smartest thing when you're standing on a burning platform.

by tc 16y ago

Well, I suppose you don't always do the smartest thing when you're standing on a burning platform.

barista 16y ago

But he question is: Is this smarter than peeing your pants to stay warm :)

rbanffy 16y ago
It's more like setting the platform on fire to stay warm. oh... wait...

wsf 16y ago

What choice does Nokia has? 1. Choose Android and be delegated to one of the hardware supplier amongst HTC, Samsung etc (not necessary the preferred one). 2. Stick with Symbian, Meego and be slower and further down road (Users don't care about the OS. Just whether it works. I would argue that developing OS internally is just playing catching up with minimal hope of overtaking the others significantly) 3. Try Microsoft and hopes the strengths compliment one another (not-too-bad windows phone 7). I don't envy Nokia. It's a tough choice. Effectively, they are trying to move into a field just disrupted by Apple and competing on a sustaining basis. Doesn't bode well but what other alternatives do they have?

davidw 16y ago
With MS, they'll be "one hardware supplier amongst many", but with less leverage and freedom to make the platform theirs than with Android.
- bodyfour 16y ago
  Do we know enough about the terms of the partnership to know that? MS is certainly capable of screwing over their existing hardware partners (see also: PlaysForSure) My hunch is that Nokia wouldn't have gone for the deal if they're just going to be another mere supplier.
  - davidw 16y ago
    Sure, they might get some perks, but I just don't see MS having it in them to really give them a long leash.
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    My impression is that nobody but an ex-Microsoft employee would even consider such idea. This partnership benefits Microsoft's executives in the mobile division, who will have their vindication in a major phone maker going with their platform instead of Android. Their bonuses will be outlandish this year. It hardly benefits Nokia, who is betting the company on an unknown platform nobody else is betting on. A friend of mine usually said that when you see two lines in the bank, one being much shorter than the other, you can bet the short one is the wrong line for you.
    - aphexairlines 16y ago
      Not just an ex-MS employee -- the former head of Office (and the rest of the business division) who might still hold a truckload of MS stock.
      - rbanffy 16y ago
        I don't think he would be allowed to have Microsoft stock while running a company that competes with Microsoft on some fronts. Well.. Stranger things have happened.
      - Splines 16y ago
        Elop's time at MS was quite short. IMO, he couldn't fill Sinofsky's shoes.
        aphexairlines 16y ago
        Implying that he did a bad job at MS doesn't sound plausible since he was offered a CEO position in another megacorp.
- detst 16y ago
  Right, and even if they get a sweet deal from Microsoft, they are still betting on an unknown with much of their success dependent on Microsoft. In Android, they'd build on a known platform with success or failure in their own hands. Don't like what Google is doing in the future? They'd have options without abandoning the platform. Hell, they could let Google develop the core, port Qt, use Bing maps and search, and Amazon Appstore.
mbreese 16y ago
Has anyone ever come out of a Microsoft partnership stronger? I agree, though that this something that is only done by a desperate company with few choices.
- philwelch 16y ago
  Intel.
- seertaak 16y ago
  IIRC Microsoft invested in Apple at their low point, and also agreed to continue to support their Office suite on Apple computers. I would call that a partnership.
  - mbreese 16y ago
    Yeah, others mentioned this lower in the thread. I'm not so sure that this would be a good example of a partnership, because Microsoft didn't really get much from Apple. Apple got back some legitimacy as a platform. I remember betting at the time that they'd be out of business before 2000 (this was before the return of Jobs). Microsoft gave them the ability to say, we're going to be around for a while, and our customers are going to be able to get work done. What Microsoft gained (aside from a good return on investment) was something that they could point to when negotiating with the DOJ. A strong Apple was absolutely required for Microsoft to remain intact. So what Microsoft really got wasn't a partner, but a competitor.
    - krevis 16y ago
      There was a bit more to it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Canyon_Company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Canyon_Company Microsoft also got a patent cross-licensing deal with Apple, IE shipping as the default browser on Macs (a blow against Netscape), and a settlement on some messy lawsuits. (I imagine a lot of lawyers got paid, too... what a mess!)
    - seertaak 16y ago
      > What Microsoft gained (aside from a good return on investment) was something that they could point to when negotiating with the DOJ. A strong Apple was absolutely required for Microsoft to remain intact. So what Microsoft really got wasn't a partner, but a competitor. Yeah, it was a sort of cynical "partnership". I think your analysis is bang-on.
bodyfour 16y ago
I basically agree. Look at the deal from MSFT's perspective: 1. They are desperate to get (back) into the mobile OS market. For a company that is built on OS dominance this is an existential crisis... much more than Google Search ever could be. 2. Everything they have tried so far has failed, badly. How many W7 phones have you seen in the wild? 3. Hooking up with partner like Nokia (remember: still the largest phone manufacturer, albeit mostly not smartphones) is probably the only credible move MSFT can make that may reverse this. This implies that the deal probably is costing MSFT dearly. They needed Nokia, and Nokia knew it. Remember: Microsoft still has more money than god. We've seen with Xbox that they're willing to use that cash to muscle into markets with entrenched players. If they want it bad enough they can be a force... imagine if they subsidize the hardware enough to make the phones almost free, buy several of the top indie iOS developers, and buy a pact with companies like EA to make new titles W7 exclusive at launch. There's no reason to think they'll WIN.. after all, Apple and Google are hardly paupers. I'm just saying that it could get real interesting. Or maybe it won't. MSFT might continue to make no headway in the market and Nokia will just end up going down the tubes.
- brc 16y ago
  Don't forget MS still controls an army of developers, and is mobilising a lot of resources to help transfer skills from winforms/asp.net to win 7 mobile development. There will be plenty of apps development for w7 as long as the platform can reach some type of critical mass.
torpor 16y ago
They could make their Meego-based phones incredibly easy - and fun - to develop for! They could attract developers by doing the one thing that nobody else wants to do: ship the phones with the compiler onboard! :) This would disrupt things immensely - imagine if, all you had to do to build an app for your phone, was connect to it over a web browser, or so on ..
kingsley_20 16y ago
HTC is differentiating quite nicely within the Android ecosystem on the UX layer.
- Splines 16y ago
  Their exchange client is awesome (at least, I think it's owned by HTC). I could do without the extra widgety stuff.
Ruudjah 16y ago
Android is for a large deal open source. That would enable Nokia to continue their Meego strategy, along with Qt. They don't need to develop the API and core sets, but can focus on the apps (higher level). That means either laying off a whole bunch of devvers, or moving them to app development. Also, linux can use some decent developed UI toolkits. Nokia easily can cut a deal with Google for Android store revenue sharing. Especially if Microsoft is in the market, too for alliance candidates. Choosing Android makes actually quite a lot of sense to me, from a Nokia POV.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
aik 16y ago
I think an important point is also that Nokia isn't abandoning MeeGo and their own OSes. Those I imagine will play a significant role in the future (again).
- Geee 16y ago
  Well you are wrong.. They abandoned them. MeeGo is cut down to be experimental side project, probably to not piss Intel and other partners off.
  - aik 16y ago
    Hold on. Nokia does a ridiculous amount of research into cell phone technology. I agree it's a side project now, but do you think they seriously are "abandoning" it? Where have you heard that? I don't think Nokia would completely throw away that much good work...
    - Geee 16y ago
      They are not and will not be pushing it as their primary platform. It will remain as a research project as it has been. In my book that means abandoning; there won't be any "ecosystem" for it.
stuaxo 16y ago
Or... Maemo was working, just punt phones out the door running that (with capacitive touchscreens).
shareme 16y ago
ahem Sony Ericsson had one of the worse positions among all OEMs and they managed to do it..

jquery 16y ago

Am i the only person here who finds this really exciting?Windows 7 is probably the best piece of software I have ever used, and yes I have a MacBook pro and an iPhone so I'm not some fanboy. So the world's best OS is about to be put on some of the best mobile hardware available, with two juggernaut companies putting their very survival on the line. I am so glad the market is getting shaken up like this, no matter what happens the consumers will be the ultimate winners of such brutal competition. Android can no longer coast on being the only good alternative to iOS.

vegai 16y ago
Windows 7 isn't Windows Mobile 7, is it? The latter has been a full rewrite, so in many ways, it's completely different from everything else they have. Not that it couldn't be good, just that you cannot automatically think that it is from Windows 7's qualities.
- jquery 16y ago
  I didn't know that, but in no way does it really dampen my enthusiasm. To me, Win7 proved Microsoft was still King of OS's, so I can't wait to see their upcoming flagship mobile product. I am sure they will take the lessons of Android and iOS to heart with the first major launch of this partnership. This is a huge opportunity for both companies to take the mobile world by storm. Color me disappointed if this fails, but I think it has more potential to shake up the industry than anything else announced so far thus year.
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    > Win7 proved Microsoft was still King of OS's, No fanboy, you say...
    - Stormbringer 16y ago
      Say what you like, but up until the XBox ring of death debacle Microsoft made really good hardware.