3 ms·

there are so many established android players already. I doubt that would help them much. At least the premium W8 strategy differentiates them from samsung and

there are so many established android players already. I doubt that would help them much. At least the premium W8 strategy differentiates them from samsung and co.

tluyben2 14y ago
That's true, but people are not really buying. And Nokia still is popular in a lot of low wage countries now and they would want to buy Androids at sub $100, while not Windows over $200.
- untog 14y ago
  Why not Windows at sub $100? It's definitely a market MS are targeting.
  - tluyben2 14y ago
    That would be smart, but seems they are doing high end (tablets + phones) at the moment with WP8.
cookiecaper 14y ago
I'm sure Microsoft would be content to continue to allow Nokia to pursue Windows Phone in a non-exclusive relationship. No reason Nokia shouldn't be releasing high-end, high-demand Android units that sell like hot cakes, the same way HTC, Samsung, et al have done several times each since the G1. Maybe it'd keep them out of bankruptcy long enough to allow another couple batches of Windows units.
bad_user 14y ago
It would be pretty easy for Nokia to enter the Android market. All it would need to do is to create 2 phone models, one for the low end, one for the high end, both with good build quality and that come in various colors. And on the software side all they'd need to do would be to install the stock Android distribution, with the logistics and resources necessary to release Android updates over-the-air as soon as possible, while giving the insurance that customers will get updates for 2 years after they've bought the phone. They could also disallow carries from installing crap on these phones. They could further differentiate by bundling those phones with some premium Nokia apps, like an alternative to Google Maps with better offline capabilities. Then they should also build an Android tablet, because there's really no competition to the iPad. Like really, there are lots of Android "players" out there, but (1) Nokia still has resources and a huge distribution network available with lots of partners + (2) Android's true potential has yet to reveal itself and the pie will get a lot bigger + (3) everybody is doing it wrong.
- se85 14y ago
  It's really no where near as simple as that, not even close. There is lots of politics, and red tape to keep in mind as well that has to be overcome before they can even think about Android, let alone delivering on it. Getting rid of Elop, really doesn't change this painful process of software migration (which is never, ever "pretty easy") or everyone else that thinks Nokia/Android is a terrible idea from a business perspective (it is). Nokia has already had to go through all of this recently to accomodate the Microsoft Plan, and it is just extremely unlikely that a company the size of Nokia could survive a second transition and come out the other end smelling like roses. We are talking at least a year (and thats being very conservative and ignoring all existing and future plans that are currently in place that would need to be dismantled) before there would be a tangible Nokia Android product. There is also the large layoffs and rehires that would need to occur during this transition and this stuff takes time, lots of time when talking about a company at the scale of Nokia. I'd imagine they would lose lots of partners over this transition as well, the list is endless. My bet is it would be another year or two on top of that before Nokia was at its current state as of today on the market with Android instead of Windows, except the market will be much bigger, and Nokia will be much smaller, but hey at least they have an Android phone right? ;-) I'm sure Microsoft has Nokia by the balls as well (contractually speaking), which is just another reason amongst many others not to attempt such a transition from the business perspective. Also, it would be a very tough sell to the stakeholders, and upper management, as well as everyone else on the front lines that such a move would yield anything for Nokia besides a quicker path to hard times ahead and/or bankruptcy. The cards are all on the table, it's too late to make an "effective" transition and they know this. In an ideal world, business wouldn't get in the way of releasing a good product, but in the real world, business almost always mandates what the product is, and in Nokia's case, the business decision was made years ago and it is not something they can pivot on overnight like your typical Sillicon Valley startup.
  - bad_user 14y ago
    Well, yes, I don't think it's feasible for Nokia either, because of the costs involved and because of politics. However, all of us here that are familiar with the landscape and with Microsoft's history thought this was a bad idea from the beginning. A lot of people freaking told them so. This is especially infuriating since their N9 was a success, limited only by Nokia's decision to discontinue it from the start, with many reviewers calling it "one of the most fascinating phones of the last few years". And Nokia is not a startup, but a big company that should have the resources to branch out a little and test the water with an Android phone. That's how smart companies are doing it - they are A/B testing competing solutions. Take a look at Google - that's still working on Chrome OS, in spite of Android being a success. And I get that Nokia wanted to focus on fewer products, to preserve resources, however they've gone to the extremes, throwing away years of hard work and even consumer goodwill, adopting an operating system that they don't and will never control - at least with Android, if anything had gone wrong with the Google partnership, they could have forked it, just like Amazon did.
jsight 14y ago
If they released the Lumia 920 w/ Android 4.1, it would immediately be the second best selling Android phone, IMO.

there are so many established android players already. I doubt that would help them much. At least the premium W8 strategy differentiates them from samsung and co.

tluyben2 14y ago

That's true, but people are not really buying. And Nokia still is popular in a lot of low wage countries now and they would want to buy Androids at sub $100, while not Windows over $200.

untog 14y ago
Why not Windows at sub $100? It's definitely a market MS are targeting.
- tluyben2 14y ago
  That would be smart, but seems they are doing high end (tablets + phones) at the moment with WP8.

cookiecaper 14y ago

I'm sure Microsoft would be content to continue to allow Nokia to pursue Windows Phone in a non-exclusive relationship. No reason Nokia shouldn't be releasing high-end, high-demand Android units that sell like hot cakes, the same way HTC, Samsung, et al have done several times each since the G1. Maybe it'd keep them out of bankruptcy long enough to allow another couple batches of Windows units.

bad_user 14y ago

It would be pretty easy for Nokia to enter the Android market. All it would need to do is to create 2 phone models, one for the low end, one for the high end, both with good build quality and that come in various colors. And on the software side all they'd need to do would be to install the stock Android distribution, with the logistics and resources necessary to release Android updates over-the-air as soon as possible, while giving the insurance that customers will get updates for 2 years after they've bought the phone. They could also disallow carries from installing crap on these phones. They could further differentiate by bundling those phones with some premium Nokia apps, like an alternative to Google Maps with better offline capabilities. Then they should also build an Android tablet, because there's really no competition to the iPad. Like really, there are lots of Android "players" out there, but (1) Nokia still has resources and a huge distribution network available with lots of partners + (2) Android's true potential has yet to reveal itself and the pie will get a lot bigger + (3) everybody is doing it wrong.

se85 14y ago
It's really no where near as simple as that, not even close. There is lots of politics, and red tape to keep in mind as well that has to be overcome before they can even think about Android, let alone delivering on it. Getting rid of Elop, really doesn't change this painful process of software migration (which is never, ever "pretty easy") or everyone else that thinks Nokia/Android is a terrible idea from a business perspective (it is). Nokia has already had to go through all of this recently to accomodate the Microsoft Plan, and it is just extremely unlikely that a company the size of Nokia could survive a second transition and come out the other end smelling like roses. We are talking at least a year (and thats being very conservative and ignoring all existing and future plans that are currently in place that would need to be dismantled) before there would be a tangible Nokia Android product. There is also the large layoffs and rehires that would need to occur during this transition and this stuff takes time, lots of time when talking about a company at the scale of Nokia. I'd imagine they would lose lots of partners over this transition as well, the list is endless. My bet is it would be another year or two on top of that before Nokia was at its current state as of today on the market with Android instead of Windows, except the market will be much bigger, and Nokia will be much smaller, but hey at least they have an Android phone right? ;-) I'm sure Microsoft has Nokia by the balls as well (contractually speaking), which is just another reason amongst many others not to attempt such a transition from the business perspective. Also, it would be a very tough sell to the stakeholders, and upper management, as well as everyone else on the front lines that such a move would yield anything for Nokia besides a quicker path to hard times ahead and/or bankruptcy. The cards are all on the table, it's too late to make an "effective" transition and they know this. In an ideal world, business wouldn't get in the way of releasing a good product, but in the real world, business almost always mandates what the product is, and in Nokia's case, the business decision was made years ago and it is not something they can pivot on overnight like your typical Sillicon Valley startup.
- bad_user 14y ago
  Well, yes, I don't think it's feasible for Nokia either, because of the costs involved and because of politics. However, all of us here that are familiar with the landscape and with Microsoft's history thought this was a bad idea from the beginning. A lot of people freaking told them so. This is especially infuriating since their N9 was a success, limited only by Nokia's decision to discontinue it from the start, with many reviewers calling it "one of the most fascinating phones of the last few years". And Nokia is not a startup, but a big company that should have the resources to branch out a little and test the water with an Android phone. That's how smart companies are doing it - they are A/B testing competing solutions. Take a look at Google - that's still working on Chrome OS, in spite of Android being a success. And I get that Nokia wanted to focus on fewer products, to preserve resources, however they've gone to the extremes, throwing away years of hard work and even consumer goodwill, adopting an operating system that they don't and will never control - at least with Android, if anything had gone wrong with the Google partnership, they could have forked it, just like Amazon did.

jsight 14y ago

If they released the Lumia 920 w/ Android 4.1, it would immediately be the second best selling Android phone, IMO.