6 ms·

Nokia were the kings of mobile back when phones were simple, so why the hell haven't they ditched Windows Phone and made phones simple once again?! I bet there

by EnderMB 14y ago

Nokia were the kings of mobile back when phones were simple, so why the hell haven't they ditched Windows Phone and made phones simple once again?! I bet there's a huge market out there for older users that want a simple and usable phone with stripped functionality, and it's a tactic that worked very well for Nintendo when they realised that they couldn't compete with Sony and Microsoft in the console market. A lot of older users just want a mobile phone so they can get in touch with family, send a few texts to people and occasionally browse the web. If linked with a company like Yahoo (providing mail and other basic cloud stuff) I'd be shocked if a phone that focused on being a phone and not a smartphone didn't sell millions amongst the tech-illiterate and older audience.

monsterix 14y ago
Painful metamorphosis is probably the right term to be used here. They could acquire the smaller and profit-making players in dumb-phone markets and let them function independently - kill their own overheads in "small-margins" game. Nokia should reinvent their focus to something else - not continue on mobile platform now. Just like they did in past by moving away from cables to rubber tyres and so on... They're late for the tablet game too, but an enterprise centric tactile surface (which is portable too) sounds like a good idea [Sheesh! Given away the idea, but the world would be a better place with it ;) ]. There is a gap in there which they could surely fill. I don't know about Elop's strengths or weaknesses, but for me Nokia is still a severely defocused bloat. Strip down to basics is the only advise here. Just a few thoughts.
- r00fus 14y ago
  > They're late for the tablet game too, but an enterprise centric tactile surface (which is portable too) sounds like a good idea [Sheesh! Given away the idea, but the world would be a better place with it ;) ]. This is what killed RIM - they bet on an enterprise tablet over their phone market, and failed. The whole "enterprise tablet" market is either ripe for the picking or no-man's land - and I don't think Nokia could have done better than RIM. When failing, you need to cut back on unprofitable side-ventures, double-down on your core profitable offerings, execute, then re-invest that into new markets.
paulsilver 14y ago
Nokia do still make some great versions of non-smartphones, I've seen a nice dual-SIM one being aimed at South America via a friend working on the project. However, I think smartphones are where the profit is. Once companies have seen the huge profits Apple have made, they want a piece of that pie. And frankly, who can blame them? My wife just got a new phone. She wanted a basic phone as she likes texting on a standard phone keypad, and wanted an OK camera on it. She couldn't get a basic phone that did that, so ended up with a low end HTC Android (of the same spec as my mid-high end HTC from last year.) It could be the phone networks just don't want to stock basic phones as they don't make enough money off the contracts for them, they want to sell all the extras. On the flip side, last time I looked at basic phones they all seemed very poorly made and with awful interfaces, which is why I went to a smartphone a few years ago. There are simple, large print phones targeted for older folk, they mainly seem to be advertised in the little pull-out magazines that come inside TV listing mags and similar in the UK, and during advert breaks on daytime TV.
prawks 14y ago
The problem with your Nintendo analogy is that Nintendo introduced a new market into playing video games (families, non-gamers). A more accurate analogy to Nokia making dumb phones would be if Nintendo had created a console that appealed to legacy-gamers, people who want to play SNES and NES games. A much smaller (and dwindling) market.
raverbashing 14y ago
Profits are smaller on simpler phones
gnaffle 14y ago
Guess what, there is already a phone that works wonderfully for people who only wants to call people, send a few texts and occasionally browse the web. It's called an iPhone and my parents have one. They perfectly fit the use case you're describing. They haven't downloaded any apps, they browse the web once in a while, but mostly they use the phones for calling and SMS (and my father checks his email). With their previous Nokia dumbphones, they never even learnt how to use the T9 dictionary. Of course, it's still an expensive phone, but many of those older people get their iPhones for free when their children upgrade to a newer model.
- bornhuetter 14y ago
  If that's all they are doing, then any smartphone will do the trick. If your basically throwing away your old iPhone anyway then sure give it to your parents. For anyone who isn't getting a free iPhone, spending $800 on one would be absolute overkill when you can buy a cheap $100-$200 phone that makes calls just as well.
- sp332 14y ago
  It is kind of expensive, and relatively easy to break. You could get an indestructable Lumia 900 for $0 on contract for a while and I think it never went over $100. Right now you can get one for $20 on the Amazon Wireless page.
- bad_user 14y ago
  There are multiple problems with your statement ... - It shows you're an American, otherwise you wouldn't hand-wave the price of an iPhone, even when speaking about phones being given by kids to parents. - the iPhone seems simple to you because you've gotten used to it. Compared with classic rotary phones, the iPhone is anything but simple - of course, for the provided functionality, the iPhone has a lot of features packed in a tight package that has a pretty simple interface by today's standards. But regarding parents, on the contrary, I've watched my mom struggle with an iPhone, before she got back to an older Nokia model, with a simple key pad and no extra functionality other than SMS. - because of the specs, the iPhone consumes a lot of battery, even by using it only for your basic needs - it's sure nice to have a phone with a battery that lasts for 7 days of normal usage. - mobile phones are designed to be usable for 2 years, after which the battery and the hardware start falling apart. Also, the T9 dictionary was really awkward. I don't think anybody was suggesting that Nokia should return to their older models. I do think that some company in the future will come up with a sexy design and a set of features for simple phones that customers will absolutely love.

by EnderMB 14y ago

monsterix 14y ago

Painful metamorphosis is probably the right term to be used here. They could acquire the smaller and profit-making players in dumb-phone markets and let them function independently - kill their own overheads in "small-margins" game. Nokia should reinvent their focus to something else - not continue on mobile platform now. Just like they did in past by moving away from cables to rubber tyres and so on... They're late for the tablet game too, but an enterprise centric tactile surface (which is portable too) sounds like a good idea [Sheesh! Given away the idea, but the world would be a better place with it ;) ]. There is a gap in there which they could surely fill. I don't know about Elop's strengths or weaknesses, but for me Nokia is still a severely defocused bloat. Strip down to basics is the only advise here. Just a few thoughts.

r00fus 14y ago
> They're late for the tablet game too, but an enterprise centric tactile surface (which is portable too) sounds like a good idea [Sheesh! Given away the idea, but the world would be a better place with it ;) ]. This is what killed RIM - they bet on an enterprise tablet over their phone market, and failed. The whole "enterprise tablet" market is either ripe for the picking or no-man's land - and I don't think Nokia could have done better than RIM. When failing, you need to cut back on unprofitable side-ventures, double-down on your core profitable offerings, execute, then re-invest that into new markets.

paulsilver 14y ago

Nokia do still make some great versions of non-smartphones, I've seen a nice dual-SIM one being aimed at South America via a friend working on the project. However, I think smartphones are where the profit is. Once companies have seen the huge profits Apple have made, they want a piece of that pie. And frankly, who can blame them? My wife just got a new phone. She wanted a basic phone as she likes texting on a standard phone keypad, and wanted an OK camera on it. She couldn't get a basic phone that did that, so ended up with a low end HTC Android (of the same spec as my mid-high end HTC from last year.) It could be the phone networks just don't want to stock basic phones as they don't make enough money off the contracts for them, they want to sell all the extras. On the flip side, last time I looked at basic phones they all seemed very poorly made and with awful interfaces, which is why I went to a smartphone a few years ago. There are simple, large print phones targeted for older folk, they mainly seem to be advertised in the little pull-out magazines that come inside TV listing mags and similar in the UK, and during advert breaks on daytime TV.

prawks 14y ago

The problem with your Nintendo analogy is that Nintendo introduced a new market into playing video games (families, non-gamers). A more accurate analogy to Nokia making dumb phones would be if Nintendo had created a console that appealed to legacy-gamers, people who want to play SNES and NES games. A much smaller (and dwindling) market.

raverbashing 14y ago

Profits are smaller on simpler phones

gnaffle 14y ago

Guess what, there is already a phone that works wonderfully for people who only wants to call people, send a few texts and occasionally browse the web. It's called an iPhone and my parents have one. They perfectly fit the use case you're describing. They haven't downloaded any apps, they browse the web once in a while, but mostly they use the phones for calling and SMS (and my father checks his email). With their previous Nokia dumbphones, they never even learnt how to use the T9 dictionary. Of course, it's still an expensive phone, but many of those older people get their iPhones for free when their children upgrade to a newer model.

bornhuetter 14y ago
If that's all they are doing, then any smartphone will do the trick. If your basically throwing away your old iPhone anyway then sure give it to your parents. For anyone who isn't getting a free iPhone, spending $800 on one would be absolute overkill when you can buy a cheap $100-$200 phone that makes calls just as well.
sp332 14y ago
It is kind of expensive, and relatively easy to break. You could get an indestructable Lumia 900 for $0 on contract for a while and I think it never went over $100. Right now you can get one for $20 on the Amazon Wireless page.
bad_user 14y ago
There are multiple problems with your statement ... - It shows you're an American, otherwise you wouldn't hand-wave the price of an iPhone, even when speaking about phones being given by kids to parents. - the iPhone seems simple to you because you've gotten used to it. Compared with classic rotary phones, the iPhone is anything but simple - of course, for the provided functionality, the iPhone has a lot of features packed in a tight package that has a pretty simple interface by today's standards. But regarding parents, on the contrary, I've watched my mom struggle with an iPhone, before she got back to an older Nokia model, with a simple key pad and no extra functionality other than SMS. - because of the specs, the iPhone consumes a lot of battery, even by using it only for your basic needs - it's sure nice to have a phone with a battery that lasts for 7 days of normal usage. - mobile phones are designed to be usable for 2 years, after which the battery and the hardware start falling apart. Also, the T9 dictionary was really awkward. I don't think anybody was suggesting that Nokia should return to their older models. I do think that some company in the future will come up with a sexy design and a set of features for simple phones that customers will absolutely love.