5 ms·

I think the assumption that Android would be a 'easier and safer bet' is a bit shortsighted. Nokia would be just another Android device maker competing with doz

by jsz0 16y ago

I think the assumption that Android would be a 'easier and safer bet' is a bit shortsighted. Nokia would be just another Android device maker competing with dozens of companies offering basically the same exact product except it would have a Nokia logo and some Nokia skin installed. That might have worked 2 years ago but I think it's too late now. There are established players in the Android space. How can Nokia beat HTC or Motorola if they are essentially selling the same product? Things like Zune Pass, Xbox integration, and potentially tight integration with Windows client/server could be a big competitive advantage. These are things Nokia could not do on their own. Google isn't going to piss off Samsung/HTC/Motorola by playing favorites with Nokia either. Worst case is the partnership doesn't work out and 3 years from now Nokia is puking out Android handsets. Strategically I think it's better to take a big risk early and have a solid Plan B to fallback on. Nokia can afford to take the risk now.

fungi 16y ago
as far as i can see nokia could differentiate themselves a hell of alot more and with far more confidence with android then with ms win mobile. now nokia is dependent on microsoft to let them differentiate. and while android is open source there is less scope for google to "play favorites" then with win mobile, i.e. there is "no freedom fork" anything, microsoft is perfectly within their rights to go play favorites with Samsung/HTC/Motorola (just as they are now apparently doing with nokia). but i have heard what you are saying a few times now so i would like to know why/how microsofts tightly controlled platform will deliver nokia greater power to differentiate themselves? edit: found this http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1992208&cid=35183600 http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1992208&cid=3... which does _partially_ cloud my puritanical open source views of the world.
- jackvalentine 16y ago
  I think when he said "play favourites" he was more referring to how one marque gets made the favourite for each major android release. Motorola for 2.0, HTC for 2.2, Samsung for 2.3, Motorola for 3.0 tablets etc... all the other manufacturers are effectively let out in the cold until the big launch is over. We have no idea exactly what the Nokia/Microsoft deal entails, but as a worst possibility they will get updates at the same time as other makers. I don't think Microsoft is going to delay updates for HTC/Samsung et al in favour of Nokia, but there will be something in the deal for Nokia.
  - jsz0 16y ago
    Yes. Specifically the Motorola/Honeycomb deal. There were some unhappy Android tablet makers at CES. That plus Google dropping 2.3 source about 2 weeks before CES leaving so many companies showing off 'dated' 2.2 products on the floor -- not endearing. Practically speaking it may not be a major issue but I think Nokia has a little too much pride for that. You can bet good money Nokia will be showing off the first WM8 device.
- jallmann 16y ago
  Are you trolling? > as far as i can see nokia could differentiate themselves a hell of alot more and with far more confidence with android then with ms win mobile. GP had a whole bunch of reasons why going with MS is probably a better strategic decision for Nokia. You have given none to counter those. Regarding playing favorites: so what. That's business. Live by the sword, die by the sword. Could have made the same argument regarding favoritism about Symbian a few years ago before Nokia bought them out completely.
  - fungi 16y ago
    > Are you trolling? no
- jsz0 16y ago
  Android may be open source but realistically how far can anyone diverge while maintaing compatibility, consistency, and the ability to push updates out in a timely fashion? At least with Microsoft they are entering a formal agreement. All these details have probably been worked out. Microsoft may have offered to let Nokia into the inner-circle of WM development. They may have agreed to have MS developers work very closely with Nokia for customizations. Hard to say without knowing all the details but it's doubtful Google would have agreed to the same terms since they simply don't need Nokia. It reminds me of this story about K-9 developers wanting to re-integrate some of their enhancements back into ASOP and Google's response was basically 'nahhh' or Google giving Motorola sweetheart access to Honeycomb while leaving other tablet makers moaning & groaning on the CES floor. Those types of things probably contributed to Nokia's choice. Nokia wants to be actively involved in OS development. Their own efforts failed. Nokia being a somewhat old fashion sort of company was probably not comfortable with the uncertainty behind Google's rather blackbox-ish control of Android. In an ironic way Microsoft was actually offering more flexibility and openness of development plus all the perks of free marketing dollars, joint promotions, and generally being treated like a first class citizen with a contract to define the exact terms of the relationship.
  - fungi 16y ago
    > They may have agreed to have MS developers work very closely with Nokia for customizations. Hard to say without knowing all the details if thats true > In an ironic way Microsoft was actually offering more flexibility and openness of development then yes that would be the case. personally i doubt that microsoft gave up any significant control of win mobile and there has been little evidence to suggest it has. that said microsoft would not want nokia going on about how they get to do what they want with ms win mobile as that would only discourage investment in the platform by Samsung/HTC/LG who ms still need as it will be a good 18~24 months before nokia is shipping significant volumes.
    - ks 16y ago
      According to Engadget, "[Nokia] has been given the liberty to play around inside WP7 to its heart's content". http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2206238 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2206238
rodh257 16y ago
exactly. Despite being a fan of Android I'd have been disappointed if they headed in that direction. Adopting Android would have been surrendering and becoming 'one of the crowd', they needed a point of differentiation, rocking up late to the Android game wasn't going to turn that company around.
jan_g 16y ago
>Nokia would be just another Android device maker competing with dozens of companies offering basically the same exact product except it would have a Nokia logo and some Nokia skin installed Excuse me for asking, but how is this different to being just another WP7 device maker?
- mistermann 16y ago
  Far less of them. All other things being equal, I would likely go with a windows phone, and likely a lot of other people would....all other things being equal, which we may never see.
wisty 16y ago
Nokia can differentiate themselves by making better hardware (build, screen, camera, keys, battery, etc) than all the other Androids. They did that quite successfully when they were competing in the mobile phone market (which has now been killed by the smartphone actually getting smart). A mobile is a fashion statement, and Nokia is only second to Apple. That said, Windows is still an option. In China, Nokia's best market, even Apple computers run Windows, so a Windows phone might have an advantage over an iPhone. Hacker-news readers (myself included) won't love it as much as a Linux / OSX phone, but it's still reasonable business sense. I don't like WinCE, but it might have come a long way. Maybe it's as good as Android now.
rbanffy 16y ago
> Nokia would be just another Android device maker competing with dozens of companies Why would Microsoft favor Nokia over its own interests of selling WP7 to every phone maker out there? The only reason Nokia faces little competition is because nobody wants WP7. If Nokia takes the risk and proves WP7 is viable, other phone makers will use it. If it fails, it's doomed. From Microsoft's point-of-view this is perfect - all the downside is Nokia's and all the upside is theirs. > offering basically the same exact product except I can tell you Android phones from Sony Ericsson, HTC, Motorola and Samsung are quite different from one another. Some are more alike, having more in common with Android base implementation, and some others are totally different. My Nook, although running Android and having 3G doesn't look like an Android phone at all. > Google isn't going to piss off Samsung/HTC/Motorola by playing favorites with Nokia either Your assumption that Microsoft would not piss of Nokia, now that Nokia bet its future on their cooperation, is very risky. Microsoft will do whatever it needs to increase market penetration of WP7, with no regard whether that pleases Nokia.
- tomjen3 16y ago
  >Why would Microsoft favor Nokia over its own interests of selling WP7 to every phone maker out there? The only reason Nokia faces little competition is because nobody wants WP7. If Nokia takes the risk and proves WP7 is viable, other phone makers will use it. If it fails, it's doomed. From Microsoft's point-of-view this is perfect - all the downside is Nokia's and all the upside is theirs. Because you don't license software from Microsoft without getting an exclusive license (or at the very least a preferable one). Microsoft versus IBM is the canonical example of why you don't. Nokia couldn't possible have been stupid enough to forget that.
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    > Because you don't license software from Microsoft without getting an exclusive license (or at the very least a preferable one). Other phone makers already make WP7 phones. Nokia doesn't have an exclusive deal and Microsoft would never, ever, even think about allowing Nokia to be the only WP7 phone licensee (or even a very preferred one). Microsoft likes leverage.
- 16y ago
drdaeman 16y ago
Nokia has MeeGo, which is able to run Android apps using Alien Dalvik (sure, this is more proof-of-concept for now, than the real thing, but this is certanly feasible). They could profit from two already strong ecosystems at once (GNU/Linux and Android), while not being Yet Another Android Vendor. Now they are just a hardware vendor for WP7 platform (which is not a "ecosystem" yet).
- rm445 16y ago
  Yes Nokia has MeeGo, but for some reason they just haven't been able to get it out of the door. It has been nearly ready for months and months, and it's a real shame because even as 'nearly ready' it's a really nice environment. I haven't been able to find out just why MeeGo development didn't deliver, but it's apparent that whatever was going on internally, Nokia just wasn't willing to bet the company on it.
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    Could it be the CEO has been declaring it not ready until he got his way with the Microsoft deal?
gonzo 16y ago
Unstated: Nokia got a very inexpensive, possibly free license to WP. It's structured via offsetting transfer payments, of course, but still. Likely Nokia pays no more for WP7 than HTC pays for Android. Microsoft is going to market the hell out of the relationship and resulting phones.
- stcredzero 16y ago
  It's quite a savvy move. Microsoft's strengths are marketing and software. Nokia knows how to engineer hardware. The employees weren't handled correctly. If I were Apple and Google, I'd now be poaching some Nokia employees.

by jsz0 16y ago

fungi 16y ago

as far as i can see nokia could differentiate themselves a hell of alot more and with far more confidence with android then with ms win mobile. now nokia is dependent on microsoft to let them differentiate. and while android is open source there is less scope for google to "play favorites" then with win mobile, i.e. there is "no freedom fork" anything, microsoft is perfectly within their rights to go play favorites with Samsung/HTC/Motorola (just as they are now apparently doing with nokia). but i have heard what you are saying a few times now so i would like to know why/how microsofts tightly controlled platform will deliver nokia greater power to differentiate themselves? edit: found this http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1992208&cid=35183600 http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1992208&cid=3... which does _partially_ cloud my puritanical open source views of the world.

jackvalentine 16y ago
I think when he said "play favourites" he was more referring to how one marque gets made the favourite for each major android release. Motorola for 2.0, HTC for 2.2, Samsung for 2.3, Motorola for 3.0 tablets etc... all the other manufacturers are effectively let out in the cold until the big launch is over. We have no idea exactly what the Nokia/Microsoft deal entails, but as a worst possibility they will get updates at the same time as other makers. I don't think Microsoft is going to delay updates for HTC/Samsung et al in favour of Nokia, but there will be something in the deal for Nokia.
- jsz0 16y ago
  Yes. Specifically the Motorola/Honeycomb deal. There were some unhappy Android tablet makers at CES. That plus Google dropping 2.3 source about 2 weeks before CES leaving so many companies showing off 'dated' 2.2 products on the floor -- not endearing. Practically speaking it may not be a major issue but I think Nokia has a little too much pride for that. You can bet good money Nokia will be showing off the first WM8 device.
jallmann 16y ago
Are you trolling? > as far as i can see nokia could differentiate themselves a hell of alot more and with far more confidence with android then with ms win mobile. GP had a whole bunch of reasons why going with MS is probably a better strategic decision for Nokia. You have given none to counter those. Regarding playing favorites: so what. That's business. Live by the sword, die by the sword. Could have made the same argument regarding favoritism about Symbian a few years ago before Nokia bought them out completely.
- fungi 16y ago
  > Are you trolling? no
jsz0 16y ago
Android may be open source but realistically how far can anyone diverge while maintaing compatibility, consistency, and the ability to push updates out in a timely fashion? At least with Microsoft they are entering a formal agreement. All these details have probably been worked out. Microsoft may have offered to let Nokia into the inner-circle of WM development. They may have agreed to have MS developers work very closely with Nokia for customizations. Hard to say without knowing all the details but it's doubtful Google would have agreed to the same terms since they simply don't need Nokia. It reminds me of this story about K-9 developers wanting to re-integrate some of their enhancements back into ASOP and Google's response was basically 'nahhh' or Google giving Motorola sweetheart access to Honeycomb while leaving other tablet makers moaning & groaning on the CES floor. Those types of things probably contributed to Nokia's choice. Nokia wants to be actively involved in OS development. Their own efforts failed. Nokia being a somewhat old fashion sort of company was probably not comfortable with the uncertainty behind Google's rather blackbox-ish control of Android. In an ironic way Microsoft was actually offering more flexibility and openness of development plus all the perks of free marketing dollars, joint promotions, and generally being treated like a first class citizen with a contract to define the exact terms of the relationship.
- fungi 16y ago
  > They may have agreed to have MS developers work very closely with Nokia for customizations. Hard to say without knowing all the details if thats true > In an ironic way Microsoft was actually offering more flexibility and openness of development then yes that would be the case. personally i doubt that microsoft gave up any significant control of win mobile and there has been little evidence to suggest it has. that said microsoft would not want nokia going on about how they get to do what they want with ms win mobile as that would only discourage investment in the platform by Samsung/HTC/LG who ms still need as it will be a good 18~24 months before nokia is shipping significant volumes.
  - ks 16y ago
    According to Engadget, "[Nokia] has been given the liberty to play around inside WP7 to its heart's content". http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2206238 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2206238

rodh257 16y ago

exactly. Despite being a fan of Android I'd have been disappointed if they headed in that direction. Adopting Android would have been surrendering and becoming 'one of the crowd', they needed a point of differentiation, rocking up late to the Android game wasn't going to turn that company around.

jan_g 16y ago

>Nokia would be just another Android device maker competing with dozens of companies offering basically the same exact product except it would have a Nokia logo and some Nokia skin installed Excuse me for asking, but how is this different to being just another WP7 device maker?

mistermann 16y ago
Far less of them. All other things being equal, I would likely go with a windows phone, and likely a lot of other people would....all other things being equal, which we may never see.

wisty 16y ago

Nokia can differentiate themselves by making better hardware (build, screen, camera, keys, battery, etc) than all the other Androids. They did that quite successfully when they were competing in the mobile phone market (which has now been killed by the smartphone actually getting smart). A mobile is a fashion statement, and Nokia is only second to Apple. That said, Windows is still an option. In China, Nokia's best market, even Apple computers run Windows, so a Windows phone might have an advantage over an iPhone. Hacker-news readers (myself included) won't love it as much as a Linux / OSX phone, but it's still reasonable business sense. I don't like WinCE, but it might have come a long way. Maybe it's as good as Android now.

rbanffy 16y ago

> Nokia would be just another Android device maker competing with dozens of companies Why would Microsoft favor Nokia over its own interests of selling WP7 to every phone maker out there? The only reason Nokia faces little competition is because nobody wants WP7. If Nokia takes the risk and proves WP7 is viable, other phone makers will use it. If it fails, it's doomed. From Microsoft's point-of-view this is perfect - all the downside is Nokia's and all the upside is theirs. > offering basically the same exact product except I can tell you Android phones from Sony Ericsson, HTC, Motorola and Samsung are quite different from one another. Some are more alike, having more in common with Android base implementation, and some others are totally different. My Nook, although running Android and having 3G doesn't look like an Android phone at all. > Google isn't going to piss off Samsung/HTC/Motorola by playing favorites with Nokia either Your assumption that Microsoft would not piss of Nokia, now that Nokia bet its future on their cooperation, is very risky. Microsoft will do whatever it needs to increase market penetration of WP7, with no regard whether that pleases Nokia.

tomjen3 16y ago
>Why would Microsoft favor Nokia over its own interests of selling WP7 to every phone maker out there? The only reason Nokia faces little competition is because nobody wants WP7. If Nokia takes the risk and proves WP7 is viable, other phone makers will use it. If it fails, it's doomed. From Microsoft's point-of-view this is perfect - all the downside is Nokia's and all the upside is theirs. Because you don't license software from Microsoft without getting an exclusive license (or at the very least a preferable one). Microsoft versus IBM is the canonical example of why you don't. Nokia couldn't possible have been stupid enough to forget that.
- rbanffy 16y ago
  > Because you don't license software from Microsoft without getting an exclusive license (or at the very least a preferable one). Other phone makers already make WP7 phones. Nokia doesn't have an exclusive deal and Microsoft would never, ever, even think about allowing Nokia to be the only WP7 phone licensee (or even a very preferred one). Microsoft likes leverage.
16y ago

drdaeman 16y ago

Nokia has MeeGo, which is able to run Android apps using Alien Dalvik (sure, this is more proof-of-concept for now, than the real thing, but this is certanly feasible). They could profit from two already strong ecosystems at once (GNU/Linux and Android), while not being Yet Another Android Vendor. Now they are just a hardware vendor for WP7 platform (which is not a "ecosystem" yet).

rm445 16y ago
Yes Nokia has MeeGo, but for some reason they just haven't been able to get it out of the door. It has been nearly ready for months and months, and it's a real shame because even as 'nearly ready' it's a really nice environment. I haven't been able to find out just why MeeGo development didn't deliver, but it's apparent that whatever was going on internally, Nokia just wasn't willing to bet the company on it.
- rbanffy 16y ago
  Could it be the CEO has been declaring it not ready until he got his way with the Microsoft deal?

gonzo 16y ago

Unstated: Nokia got a very inexpensive, possibly free license to WP. It's structured via offsetting transfer payments, of course, but still. Likely Nokia pays no more for WP7 than HTC pays for Android. Microsoft is going to market the hell out of the relationship and resulting phones.

stcredzero 16y ago
It's quite a savvy move. Microsoft's strengths are marketing and software. Nokia knows how to engineer hardware. The employees weren't handled correctly. If I were Apple and Google, I'd now be poaching some Nokia employees.