4 ms·

Nokia's mistake was exclusivity. We can argue all day about whether Nokia was right to jump into bed with Windows Phone/Microsoft, but what might be a more int

Nokia's mistake was exclusivity. We can argue all day about whether Nokia was right to jump into bed with Windows Phone/Microsoft, but what might be a more interesting question is if they were right to sign exclusively with Windows Phone/Microsoft. If they had not done so they could have their current line of WP8 devices on the market, and alongside them they could be testing the waters with an Android device or two. Just let the market decide. Nokia hardware with a virgin Android installation and a handful of custom Nokia apps sounds like an appealing offering. In fact I would buy such a phone if it were available. A lot of manufacturers have been installing gunk-ware over Android (e.g. Samsung TouchWiz, HTC Sense, etc) making it slow and laggy, and delaying Android updates by between weeks and sometimes years. Virgin Android (or "the Nexus experience") is actually a real selling point for many Android fans and something Nokia could exploit. Another area where traditional Android phone manufacturers have suffered is that they simply release too many phones. This has confused consumers, weakened their marketing, and split their efforts too widely. If Nokia released no more than three devices per year (small, medium, and large) they could concentrate all of their efforts (marketing and development) in a might smaller area but get much more bang for their buck.

netcan 14y ago
Nokia hardware with a virgin Android installation and a handful of custom Nokia apps sounds like an appealing offering. That sounds right for any manufacturer. Somehow though, manufacturers seems to disagree. They prefer lots of devices + lots of tweaks to the OS.
- UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
  Tell me about it. Supposedly this is so they can "differentiate" themselves from one another... Which from a logical standpoint I can understand, but from a practical standpoint they must see that Nexus branded devices sell almost as well as their "flagship" devices, with far lower investment/maintenance? It makes me thankful that Microsoft essentially banned manufacturers from being able to skin Windows. Can you imagine PCs today if every manufacturer had a different "user experience" (similar to HTP Sense, Samsung TouchWiz, etc) and then the manufacturers (Dell, HP, etc) had to provide updates...
- takluyver 14y ago
  From the manufacturers' point of view, virgin Android doesn't have anything to tie you to their brand. They're looking at the PC market, where Dell, HP, Lenovo etc. all have the same interface, consumers have no brand loyalty, there's fierce competition on price, and margins are razor thin. That's arguably good for consumers - it keeps prices down, and we can easily mix computers from different OEMs. But the manufacturers would much rather be like Apple, with an exclusive interface attracting loyal fans who buy products with greater markup. They mostly suck at implementing it, but the potential rewards are so great that they can't resist trying.
  - netcan 14y ago
    I don't see consumers developing any loyalty to the "exclusive interface." OTOH, I do see consumers developing loyalty to good hardware. SII users that will buy the SIII (or SIV). You carry a phone around, so what it looks and feels like physically is important.
  - rthomas6 14y ago
    >From the manufacturers' point of view, virgin Android doesn't have anything to tie you to their brand. They're looking at the PC market, where Dell, HP, Lenovo etc. all have the same interface, consumers have no brand loyalty, there's fierce competition on price, and margins are razor thin. But is there anything actually useful in these software additions? It looks like it's just skins, and maybe some clock and weather widgets. Do people actually say, "I want to buy another HTC/Samsung phone because they have that widget."? Manufacturers actually do add their own software onto PCs as well, but it's all shit and bloatware. The closest to useful software from a hardware vendor that I've seen (outside of the exception of Apple) is software for individual components, like EVGA video cards or ASUS motherboards. It's like the hardware manufacturers usually don't think about the actual utility of the software they're putting on the PCs/phones, and the only point of it is some kind of brand differentiation. Which is absurd, when you think about it.
    - takluyver 14y ago
      I agree - our tech would work better if OEMs stuck to making hardware, ISPs were dumb pipes, and so on. But they want users to relate to them, so they relentlessly build portals, toolbars, widgets, and anything that might make some sap think 'I want a Samsung' rather than 'I want an Android phone'. My phone comes with the 'Samsung Apps' store. I've never even accepted the Ts&Cs, but if even a few percent of users go there instead of to Google Play, it's probably viable for them to build it.
untog 14y ago
Virgin Android (or "the Nexus experience") is actually a real selling point for many Android fans But it isn't a selling point for Android users- the other 90% of the market that aren't Android fans. Most have no idea what "stock" is, or why they might want it.
- trimbo 14y ago
  > Most have no idea what "stock" is, or why they might want it. Don't you think it's trending towards people knowing though? E.g. N4 being instantly sold out, worldwide. Could be thanks in part to Google's huge campaign both online and on TV for Nexus.
  - untog 14y ago
    To an extent. I don't think it's either/or, though- I've heard plenty of people talking about their "HTC" or their "S3". I'm not sure that many people consider them Androids, as such.
  - thematt 14y ago
    The fact that N4 sold out instantly means little by itself without knowing how many phones they produced.
tellarin 14y ago
People seem to forget that Nokia still has another OS running on their S40 devices. And they keep selling well. The new Asha devices are pretty good. The way I see, they'll only become more and more important for Nokia as they "evolve" along with the markets where they're sold.
- Zigurd 14y ago
  This is true as far as it goes. Nokia and Samsung between them hold most of the under-$100 price band in mobile phones, so it's not just Asha but ultra-low-cost phones where Nokia is holding ground. But this is no longer most of the phone business. Nokia used to be in a class by itself, with 35% of the whole handset business worldwide. That is down to something like 5%, and that part is the low-margin business, so margin contribution makes that picture even worse. The bad news is that $50 Androids are coming and $90 Androids are pretty good. That's right in the Asha price range.

netcan 14y ago

Nokia hardware with a virgin Android installation and a handful of custom Nokia apps sounds like an appealing offering. That sounds right for any manufacturer. Somehow though, manufacturers seems to disagree. They prefer lots of devices + lots of tweaks to the OS.

UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
Tell me about it. Supposedly this is so they can "differentiate" themselves from one another... Which from a logical standpoint I can understand, but from a practical standpoint they must see that Nexus branded devices sell almost as well as their "flagship" devices, with far lower investment/maintenance? It makes me thankful that Microsoft essentially banned manufacturers from being able to skin Windows. Can you imagine PCs today if every manufacturer had a different "user experience" (similar to HTP Sense, Samsung TouchWiz, etc) and then the manufacturers (Dell, HP, etc) had to provide updates...
takluyver 14y ago
From the manufacturers' point of view, virgin Android doesn't have anything to tie you to their brand. They're looking at the PC market, where Dell, HP, Lenovo etc. all have the same interface, consumers have no brand loyalty, there's fierce competition on price, and margins are razor thin. That's arguably good for consumers - it keeps prices down, and we can easily mix computers from different OEMs. But the manufacturers would much rather be like Apple, with an exclusive interface attracting loyal fans who buy products with greater markup. They mostly suck at implementing it, but the potential rewards are so great that they can't resist trying.
- netcan 14y ago
  I don't see consumers developing any loyalty to the "exclusive interface." OTOH, I do see consumers developing loyalty to good hardware. SII users that will buy the SIII (or SIV). You carry a phone around, so what it looks and feels like physically is important.
- rthomas6 14y ago
  >From the manufacturers' point of view, virgin Android doesn't have anything to tie you to their brand. They're looking at the PC market, where Dell, HP, Lenovo etc. all have the same interface, consumers have no brand loyalty, there's fierce competition on price, and margins are razor thin. But is there anything actually useful in these software additions? It looks like it's just skins, and maybe some clock and weather widgets. Do people actually say, "I want to buy another HTC/Samsung phone because they have that widget."? Manufacturers actually do add their own software onto PCs as well, but it's all shit and bloatware. The closest to useful software from a hardware vendor that I've seen (outside of the exception of Apple) is software for individual components, like EVGA video cards or ASUS motherboards. It's like the hardware manufacturers usually don't think about the actual utility of the software they're putting on the PCs/phones, and the only point of it is some kind of brand differentiation. Which is absurd, when you think about it.
  - takluyver 14y ago
    I agree - our tech would work better if OEMs stuck to making hardware, ISPs were dumb pipes, and so on. But they want users to relate to them, so they relentlessly build portals, toolbars, widgets, and anything that might make some sap think 'I want a Samsung' rather than 'I want an Android phone'. My phone comes with the 'Samsung Apps' store. I've never even accepted the Ts&Cs, but if even a few percent of users go there instead of to Google Play, it's probably viable for them to build it.

untog 14y ago

Virgin Android (or "the Nexus experience") is actually a real selling point for many Android fans But it isn't a selling point for Android users- the other 90% of the market that aren't Android fans. Most have no idea what "stock" is, or why they might want it.

trimbo 14y ago
> Most have no idea what "stock" is, or why they might want it. Don't you think it's trending towards people knowing though? E.g. N4 being instantly sold out, worldwide. Could be thanks in part to Google's huge campaign both online and on TV for Nexus.
- untog 14y ago
  To an extent. I don't think it's either/or, though- I've heard plenty of people talking about their "HTC" or their "S3". I'm not sure that many people consider them Androids, as such.
- thematt 14y ago
  The fact that N4 sold out instantly means little by itself without knowing how many phones they produced.

tellarin 14y ago

People seem to forget that Nokia still has another OS running on their S40 devices. And they keep selling well. The new Asha devices are pretty good. The way I see, they'll only become more and more important for Nokia as they "evolve" along with the markets where they're sold.

Zigurd 14y ago
This is true as far as it goes. Nokia and Samsung between them hold most of the under-$100 price band in mobile phones, so it's not just Asha but ultra-low-cost phones where Nokia is holding ground. But this is no longer most of the phone business. Nokia used to be in a class by itself, with 35% of the whole handset business worldwide. That is down to something like 5%, and that part is the low-margin business, so margin contribution makes that picture even worse. The bad news is that $50 Androids are coming and $90 Androids are pretty good. That's right in the Asha price range.