27 ms·

Nokia acquired by Microsoft

• alex_c 13y ago
  Well, this makes all the speculation about Elop succeeding Ballmer that much more interesting.
  • nestlequ1k 13y ago
    Yeah, it would be interesting to see if any MSFT shareholders are that dumb. Elop's idiocy destroyed Nokia, now let's sic him on Microsoft too.
    • mbreese 13y ago
      Nokia was well on its way down before Elop. It's not fair to pin that on him. But, it did seem pretty clear (even then) that his turnaround strategy involved a Microsoft purchase.
      • AnthonyMouse 13y ago
        I don't think you can call something a "turnaround strategy" when the result is to cause the company's value to nosedive so far that the most viable means to salvage any of their investors' money is to divest them of their stock at a significant loss. From the Nokia stockholder's perspective, even if by some miracle the company were to subsequently prosper under Microsoft, by that point they no longer own it, so how does that help them?
        • mbreese 13y ago
          I'm looking at it from a "stop the bleeding" point of view. When he took over, Nokia's stock was a little less around $9... down from it's high of almost $40 3 year earlier. Things had somewhat stabilized, but it was clear that Nokia was no longer going to be the top tier phone maker they had been for a decade. The strategy at that time was to ditch their Symbian and Linux platforms and jump 100% into the Windows Phone world. When they starting making only Windows smartphones (not including feature or dumb phones here), if things didn't improve, the obvious exit for Elop and the Nokia board was a Microsoft buyout (plan B). Now that they are trading at less than $4, it's pretty clear that something isn't working, so they need to just skip all the presences and just join Microsoft. I'm not sure how Microsoft's own transition is going to play in this, but I bet that hurried up the deal a bit. So, the benefit for the shareholders is that they won't loose any more money than they already have. Microsoft has provided a decent backstop to stop the loss in value. Plus, I haven't seen what Microsoft is actually buying... they may end up leaving the backend infrastructure products as a separate company, which would probably leave shareholders with some value.
          • bad_user 13y ago
            When he took over, Nokia still had the in-house expertise and the resources for a turnaround. In fact Nokia N9 would have been a raging success, if Eliop wouldn't have killed it. And another thing: the feature phone business is huge and underserved by Android. Nokia was in the best position to come up with a reasonable alternative.
            • mbreese 13y ago
              When Elop was brought in, the board was clearly signaling that a turnaround from within was not going to happen. The Microsoft smartphone strategy was already in place and was going to happen. I have a lot of respect for Nokia, but they had the technology for the iPhone and iPad long before Apple (roughly), and they were never able to capitalize on it. Hell, I had an N770 in 2006 and it was great. But it wasn't even close to being finished enough for the masses. My fear with MeeGo was that it wasn't in the same league as the iPhone design-wise. Hardware-wise, Nokia has always been top notch. It's the mix of software and design where they seemed to be lacking. It might be that they may have put too much emphasis on open-source and Linux graphics at the time.
              • bad_user 13y ago
                Wouldn't it be absolutely embarrassing if Firefox OS ends up capturing 5-10% of the market? And personally I think it will, just like I knew Nokia is dead after announcing their new Windows Phone strategy. Nokia is a textbook example of things not to do. All the talk about them not being able to deliver the iOS polish / experience is simply not true. That's not what killed them. What killed them is that they focused on price and quantity instead of quality, coupled with schizophrenic business decisions. Example: Nokia closed their factory in Bochum, Germany to move to Cluj, Romania for cutting costs. Then they closed their factory in Romania, with the rumours being that they'll move to Moldova. They didn't of course, moving the production to China. The reason for these moves? Simple - in both cases Nokia took advantage of subsidies granted by governments / the EU, which are given as an initial incentive. At the time, the public opinion was like "oh, but Nokia is a big capitalist and they have a duty to their shareholders" and "China makes more sense for Nokia". Well, I find a sort of poetic justice in how things turned out for them.
    • macspoofing 13y ago
      Nokia, like RIM, Microsoft, and Palm, was caught with their pants down, TWICE. First with Apple's iPhone, then with Google's Android. Basically two tech companies with no presence in mobility, took the market away from the incumbents. In hindsight, when Elop took the CEO job, it was too late to fight the iOS and Android behemoths. What could have Elop done? Gone down the Blackberry route and try to have a competing platform? Or maybe try to fight Samsung by releasing an Android phone - with no guarantees that Nokia would fare better than others who tried (looking at you HTC, Sony, LG, etc.)
      • throwaway1979 13y ago
        You make an interesting point. When I think back to the 2007, there was a huge buzz around what the iPhone would turn out to be. At that time, Nokia had some interesting R&D experiments such as the Nokia 770 tablet (followed by the n800 tablet). I worked with those devices from 06 and saw the UI improve at a steady but slow rate. The toolchain was very promising since it was just Linux+ARM. The UI chrome was called Maemo. When Android first came out, I remember thinking how inferior it was compared to the Linux OS on the Nokia tablets. Nokia had the Symbian platform at that time... how can one fault them for not promoting the Linux based system then?
  • slurry 13y ago
    It's especially interesting in light of shareholder activism by Value Act. Value Act had been against the devices strategy. Two days ago they struck a deal to get a seat on MSFT's board[0]. Was this part of the deal? Or is this an upraised finger in the rearview mirror? The kremlinology of all this is very complex. [0] http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/08/31/microsoft-strikes-agreement-with-valueact-capital/2750621/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/08/31/micr...
    • pedalpete 13y ago
      That actually could be a benefit to Microsoft having valueact on the board, though it isn't easy, I suspect opposing views are what make a board stronger, rather than weaker.
• wesleyd 13y ago
  Gee, we didn't see that coming.
• Moto7451 13y ago
  Wow, interesting timing. I wonder if Elop will end up in the running for CEO of MS as part of this.
• blinkingled 13y ago
  So Elop was in fact a Trojan Horse? Wonder what this does to the already strained MSFT vendor relationships. You could now almost guarantee vendors will start to completely dump Windows on ARM and possibly even look for alternatives to Windows x86.
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  • Moto7451 13y ago
    I disagree. I doubt purchasing Nokia's phone business would make PC vendors any more worried than Surface/Surface Pro did. Windows is still king of the desktop and unless Android becomes a desktop OS or Apple starts licensing OS X there aren't any real alternatives with consumer brand recognition. If Ubuntu were the answer then System 76 would be more than a boutique PC maker. If MS starts making desktops, laptops, and servers... Then yeah it'll be a hectic day for the people responsible for Windows OEM relationships. The worry here for MS, as I see it, is really that they loose HTC and Samsung and any other potential Windows Phone partner. I'm guessing they're prepared to deal with the consequences.
    • deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
    • schuke 13y ago
      HTC and Sumsung are almost irrelevant in the Windows Phone ecosystem anyway. They obviously made little effort and aren't likely to make more, with or without the acquisition.
    • kbaker 13y ago
      Idk, sounds like the year of Linux on the desktop is closer than it has ever been. :) But you should really look at Chromebooks/ChromeOS for one glimpse of what a consumer-friendly, non-MS system would really look like. Right now it is the #1 selling laptop on Amazon, and reviews are pretty positive. If I was a shareholder in MSFT, I would seriously be worried for the future of the whole Windows platform, mobile and desktop.
• signa11 13y ago
  msft is buying "Nokia’s Devices & Services". nokia does other things as well, for example, nokia-siemens-network (NSN) is a significant player in the EPC (enhanced-packet-core) market as well...
  • adw 13y ago
    Yep, this looks more like Sony buying Ericsson out (and leaving Ericsson with a very nice, profitable core business)
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
• speeder 13y ago
  That was more or less expected... But I think it is really sad too. I really enjoyed the pre-Microsoft Nokia, I had account in their dev forums, and loved their SDKs, community, Sybian, whatnot. To me, when they suddenly dropped Sybian while they were still ahead AND expanding in some markets (like Brazil, Russia...) and switched to MS, it was really sad, and I felt like they dropped the ball. Their Lumia phones DO pull some interesting hardware sometimes, but it was never the same. Now with MS outright buying them, not only the ball is dropped, but kicked way out of the stadium.
  • obiterdictum 13y ago
    > I really enjoyed the pre-Microsoft Nokia, I had account in their dev forums, and loved their SDKs, community, Sybian, whatnot. Really? I thought their SDK circa 2007 (especially the emulator) and API docs were terrible, and Symbian C++ was a real pain to work with. Also, segregation between regular developers and Nokia partners (who paid to have access to extra private APIs) put unnecessary barriers to development. I won't miss it.
  • pavlov 13y ago
    The defunct smartphone OS was named Symbian. Sybian is a sex toy brand, I believe. You're the first person I've ever heard praising the Symbian SDK. It was a miserable mess without clear ownership or direction - Nokia made the UI while Symbian Ltd made the base OS, and neither gave a damn about third parties unless they had bags of money for special API access.
• vineet 13y ago
  What else is part of Nokia other than their 'Nokia Devices & Services'?
  • bsimpson 13y ago
    - here.com maps - mobile broadband - r&d citation: http://press.nokia.com/2013/09/03/nokia-to-sell-devices-services-business-to-microsoft-in-eur-5-44-billion-all-cash-transaction/ http://press.nokia.com/2013/09/03/nokia-to-sell-devices-serv...
    • wmt 13y ago
      Nokia Siemens Networks (NSN) is also not small
      • Swannie 13y ago
        No longer Nokia Siemens Networks. Nokia recently bought out their share from Siemens, and now called "Nokia Solutions and Networks". It's been a solid revenue generator for them. Just like Motorola which has a lot of cell tower/radio networking etc. that is didn't sell to Google, Nokia is a huge player in base stations/NodeB's, etc. that it's not selling.
  • elithrar 13y ago
    > What else is part of Nokia other than their 'Nokia Devices & Services'? As of recently, all their enterprise/industrial gear: DSLAMs, muxes, 3G/LTE gear, carrier hardware, etc. when they bought Siemens share of Nokia Siemens Networks (NSN), noting that Nokia was originally flying solo with this stuff before the JV with Siemens.
• iamshs 13y ago
  More here: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/press/2013/Sep13/09-02AnnouncementPR.aspx http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/press/2013/Sep13/09-02An...
• feniv 13y ago
  Microsoft is becoming more and more of an integrated software and hardware company than a purely software one. Maybe it's time to change the name to something without the "soft".
  • adamnemecek 13y ago
    Or Microsofthard? I'm not very good at this.
    • damianknz 13y ago
      How about: Microkia Softnok
      • fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
        Micro-stiffie
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
    • aegiso 13y ago
      It's a very old, very immature joke that adds absolutely nothing to the conversation. You've been on HN long enough that I'm surprised you're surprised.
      • StandardFuture 13y ago
        Ah, very true. Although the purpose of posting it was not for the sake of the joke itself. Anyways, I'll be more mindful of contributing to your ego (intelligence?) with my responses next time. ;)
  • oo 13y ago
    You mean "Nosoft"?
  • 13y ago
• nl 13y ago
  ~$7 Billion for the device & services business and Nokia's patents. Seems like a good price now, but one you wouldn't have ever predicted before 2007 & the launch of the iPhone. In 2003 Nokia was worth $245 billion[1] [1] http://techcrunch.com/2010/06/22/the-sad-tale-of-nokias-sinking-market-cap-where-i-come-over-all-nostalgic/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/06/22/the-sad-tale-of-nokias-sink...
  • psbp 13y ago
    There's no doubt that Nokia has been buoyed by Microsoft leading up to this acquisition. The lack of android devices would have been completely illogical if this wasn't the long game.
    • bthomas 13y ago
      I think "end game" is more appropriate than "long game"
  • notimetorelax 13y ago
    Please see this comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6318882 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6318882 they are not buying patents.
  • Lusake 13y ago
    Considering that Google acquired Motorola Mobility for $12.5b, $7b for Nokia doesnt look expensive.
  • tanzam75 13y ago
    In 2007 RIM had a market cap of $120 billion. Disruption is no fun for the disrupted.
• snorkel 13y ago
  Why is this not reported in mainstream media yet?
  • Tuna-Fish 13y ago
    The release came out 15 minutes ago. They are simply not that fast.
  • schuke 13y ago
    Because most people in Europe and North America have to wake up first? ;)
    • Qantourisc 13y ago
      I concur, I'm just awake, good morning.
  • tzs 13y ago
    At the time of your comment, it was already on the Wall Street Journal and on Rueters. Within the next 20 minutes it was on Forbes, BBC, New Zealand Herald, and Synfney Morning Herald. 10 minutes after that, it was on Seattle Times and ABC.
• ali- 13y ago
  "From January 2008 to September 2010, Elop worked for Microsoft as the head of the Business Division, responsible for the Microsoft Office and Microsoft Dynamics line of products, and as a member of the company's senior leadership team. It was during this time that Microsoft's Business Division released Office 2010.[15]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Elop http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Elop Don't believe he'll be the next CEO but certainly a possibility given his previous engagement with MSFT...
• aaronbrethorst 13y ago
  To everyone speculating about what this means for the possibility of Elop succeeding Ballmer: this means that Elop is succeeding Ballmer. End of story. edit: I would love to know why this is getting downvoted. edit2: fair enough. Two key facts: 1. Microsoft needs a new CEO. They have a limited pool to choose from. The following are seemingly reasonable candidates: - Mark Zuckerberg (never going to happen, he wouldn't agree to it) - Steve Sinofsky (that ship has sailed) - Tony Bates (seems like a reasonable choice; relative outsider, smart, has a tech background) - Another member of Steve's SLT (some would be better than others. I think a sizable portion of the company would revolt if KT was chosen). - Sheryl Sandberg (doubt it, since I think she's gunning for the US Senate) - Carly Fiorina (MS's board would never agree to it) - Stephen Elop (reasonably obvious choice: insider, devices experience, has CEO experience, but there's that pesky Nokia thing) 2. Microsoft has a new, relatively large, soon-to-be-on-the-board activist share holder in ValueAct. ValueAct will have a significant amount of authority over yea'ing or nay'ing acquisitions and over who the new CEO will be. I can't imagine there's any way Elop would agree to working under someone else again. He also seems like a not-unreasonable choice for CEO of Microsoft, outside of the fact that he hasn't exactly made Nokia back into a rip-roaring success, and doesn't represent much of a change from business as usual at Microsoft.
  • eli 13y ago
    I'm not down voting you, but "end of story" is not a great way to begin a dialogue on your unsupported opinion.
    • deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
  • Apocryphon 13y ago
    How come Paul Allen left MS and never looked back?
    • aaronbrethorst 13y ago
      Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma and a really bad falling out with Bill.
• sker 13y ago
  That kills my hopes for a Nokia Android phone. Also, Elop seems like the least interesting character to succeed Ballmer. What does he bring to the table? What has he done? Guy looks like a careerist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Elop#Career http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Elop#Career
  • bsimpson 13y ago
    I'm not sure that was ever likely with Elop at the helm, but Nokia is now out of the phone business until at least 2016.
    • deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
      • bsimpson 13y ago
        Yup: Upon the closing of the transaction, Nokia would be restricted from licensing the Nokia brand for use in connection with mobile device sales for 30 months and from using the Nokia brand on Nokia's own mobile devices until December 31, 2015. MS bought their present design team and fab facilities, but what's left of Nokia can reenter the device business in 2016.
    • jpalomaki 13y ago
      I believe the press release only speaks about the brand. There does not seem to be any limitations for Nokia to enter into phone business. They would just need to have some other brand.
      • voltagex_ 13y ago
        Maybe Jolla? :D
  • X4 13y ago
    Oouh.. that reads like he managed to get every company he worked for to fade away, go bancrupt or loose competitive strength in a very short time. This. Or he was simply at the wrong place at the wrong time, very often. * DEAD: Lotus Development Corporation * DEAD: Boston Chicken * SOLD: Macromedia's * ALIVE: Juniper Networks * DECLINING: Microsoft Dynamics I don't know this guy, but if that's the best they can get..
• devnetfx 13y ago
  Considering the amount paid for Motorola by Google, isn't it cheap?
  • arron61 13y ago
    Google bought Motorola for 12.5 billion and then sold off it's Home division for 2.3 billion. At the time of the purchase, Motorola had 2 billion in cash so in the end, Google probably paid 8 billion ish for Motorola. Considering that in those 1.5 years, Moto and Nokia's values have been decreasing as well, I think they are pretty close in value.
• undoware 13y ago
  Wow. Some call Tomi. For copious, copious background on the MS/Nokia debacle, 'burning platform' to present: communities-dominate.blogs.com (Not affiliated, just an avid fan of this mobile industry analyst-become-blogger who does his own stats. Some of the charts are chilling.)
  • goblin89 13y ago
    Tried to read a recent post there, but stopped after the statement “Nikon just recently said it plans to launch its own smartphones”. That looked like big news, so I looked it up. Turned out, Nikon's president said something along the lines of “We want to create a product that will change the concept of cameras. It could be a non-camera consumer product” early July—that is the most reliable citation on the matter I could find. So it was author's speculation, which he presented as fact on his blog. Maybe there is some useful information there, but the hassle of verifying each statement wasn't worth it for me.
    • iamshs 13y ago
      Tomi Ahonen is as anti-Nokia and MS as it gets, and hence I do not enjoy his blog. As his narrative stretches the truth a lot, and prime example is his Nokia analysis. Nokia was already in decline with Symbian, but go on his blog and he presents very contorted factoids.
    • deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
  • jpatokal 13y ago
    Actually, Tomi's latest blog post series theorized that Ballmer wanted to buy Nokia, Gates vetoed this and that's why Ballmer's getting kicked out: Gates looked at the real performance of this partnership. Gates said in public that Ballmer has made mistakes and singled out Windows Phone project as 'clearly a mistake' and so badly mismanaged, that recovery was no longer possible. Thats what Gates said on Charlie Rose in February 2013. This is when the decision was made to not buy Nokia. So we know, Ballmer wanted to buy Nokia, but Gates stepped in to override that decision. And at that moment, Ballmer's career as Microsoft CEO was ended (as I said on this blog). Gates gave Ballmer six months to quietly sort out his future but clearly said in February to Ballmer, get out. And Gates vetoed the Nokia purchase. Now Nokia has been gutted, all its options destroyed, and its up the proverbial shit's creek without a paddle. http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/brands/2013/08/ballmer-aftermath-part-2-impact-to-nokia-especially-lumia-running-windows-phone.html http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/brands/2013/08/ballmer... Doesn't quite pan out in light of MS actually buying Nokia.
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• emilyst 13y ago
  Do we imagine Elop tanked Nokia on purpose to cheapen the cost of this acquisition (and shutter the patents under one roof)?
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
• jotm 13y ago
  Well, it finally happened...
• adamwintle 13y ago
  Nokia sold to Microsoft for ~$1.5 billion less than what Skype was sold for
  • netforay 13y ago
    It is $7.17 http://allthingsd.com/20130902/microsoft-to-buy-nokias-device-business-for-7-17-billion-euros/ http://allthingsd.com/20130902/microsoft-to-buy-nokias-devic... But still less than $8.5 paid for Skype. (Which I think is total waste of money)
    • bender80 13y ago
      Well it's not all of Nokia.
    • the_economist 13y ago
      Skype accounted for an ungodly 167 billion international call minutes in 2012. It is perhaps not fair to belittle them.
      • MichaelGG 13y ago
        No, but it still makes me sick, because Microsoft had Skype capabilities a decade before Skype. NetMeeting, then MSN Messenger supported audio/video. Messenger even had telephone integration to call out, but poorly done (some shitty partnership that made you buy an account with MCI). They had SMS integration to a better extend that Skype does today. But MS's MSN/Live division was so terribly run, they missed out on turning MSN into a social network (FFS, they had everyone with their friend relationships already via Messenger!), and the Messenger software didn't promote audio/voice very well, nor did the session establishment stuff work well. They sat around for over a decade and let other people overtake them for no reason other than having terrible management. (Wave 11(?) had an installer that literally took over 30 minutes, as management wanted to search your entire disk for stuff.)
• capkutay 13y ago
  Wow. So he kept nokia stagnant while samsung and apple exploded in the smartphone market and now he gets to be CEO of another company thats been stagnant for years(he was already passed up for being CEO at MSFT before he left to nokia). I guess microsoft's strategy is to keep chasing after the devices market.
  • pedalpete 13y ago
    I'm not sure what world your on. Elop would not have been in the running as CEO of Microsoft. I don't believe he would have had enough experience at that time. Was there anybody other than Ballmer and ray Ozzie epwho would have been considered. He's actually brought Nokia back from the brink and kept a sinking ship somewhat afloat, in my opinion. At the same time, I don't think he is enough of a visionary to lead Microsoft.
    • elithrar 13y ago
      > He's actually brought Nokia back from the brink and kept a sinking ship somewhat afloat, in my opinion. At the same time, I don't think he is enough of a visionary to lead Microsoft. I share the same opinion. I think Elop cops a lot of flak from mobile enthusiasts, but the Nokia he took over had a lot of downward inertia that he needed to overcome and their new devices are actually pretty nice. They might never catch up (although I hope they do) on the ecosystem front. I believe that Nokia + Android and/or Nokia + Maemo were untenable, especially given the internal software politics Nokia was known to suffer.
    • capkutay 13y ago
      Ok well...MSFT could either choose to focus on enterprise or pick up Nokia and their CEO as a pat on the back for only losing 25% of its value every year. This plan seems more like a hail mary to catch up to apple. It could pay off but its certainly the riskiest and least logical route. I think there's significant room for innovation and profit in enterprise tech right now and much more room for failure in mobile.
      • pedalpete 13y ago
• throwaway1979 13y ago
  <quote>Two turkeys don't make an eagle</quote>
  • nivla 13y ago
    But it does feed a family of ten... keeping useless jokes aside; Despite loving my Lumia Windows phone, I am not too thrilled about this acquisition either. I just hope Microsoft's internal politics doesn't ruin Nokia's future!
    • asenna 13y ago
      > I just hope Microsoft's internal politics doesn't ruin Nokia's future! How bright do you think Nokia's future was prior to this?
      • nivla 13y ago
        Pretty bright I must say. Lumia became the fastest growing smartphones in the Asian and South American markets. For a company that resurrected itself from bankruptcy to this, does hold an impressive future if kept on its track.
• rayiner 13y ago
  This is a great move. There is no money in being an Android vendor except if you're Samsung and are totally vertically integrated. With Windows Phone, Nokia and Microsoft at least have some hope of carving out a profitable stake in the market. Anecdotally, I'm very impressed with some of the new Lumias. I got a 620 to replace my stolen iPhone, and for $200 unlocked its phenomenal phone. The build quality makes a flagship Samsung feel like cheap plastic crap. And Windows Phone flies despite the modest specs. I was disappointed in the 920 I had earlier, but at this price point the shoe is on the other foot. I hope this is portends a Microsoft phone...
  • nigelsampson 13y ago
    The market certainly seems to be agreeing with you in that the 520 and 620 are the most popular models.
  • flyt 13y ago
    How well does the first party Instagram app run on that Lumia?
    • nickbarnwell 13y ago
      Pretty well: http://www.windowsphone.com/en-us/store/app/6tag/7d795cdf-fb1b-4bdf-8f5e-76eb19f7079e http://www.windowsphone.com/en-us/store/app/6tag/7d795cdf-fb...
      • cpeterso 13y ago
        That is not a first party Instagram app.
        • nickbarnwell 13y ago
          and when I replied the parent lacked that qualifier; it was edited in.
    • usaphp 13y ago
      Better than nokia maps and nokia transit on your iphone/android.
• smegel 13y ago
  Hey guys, stop it, April 1st is like 8 months away!
• IanChiles 13y ago
  3 walled gardens is a very, very bad thing. Couple this with what Google's doing with the new Play Services and Motorola and with what Apple's been doing the entire time, and we could be in for a world of hurt when there are no "open" platforms (as in, for OEMs to build for).
  • Apocryphon 13y ago
    2013 is the debut year of Firefox OS, Ubuntu Touch, Sailfish OS, and Samsung's supposed flagship Tizen phone. Now, the question is if carriers, consumers and OEMs will respond to them with any enthusiasm, or treat them like third parties in American politics.
    • Karunamon 13y ago
      That would depend entirely on how they present themselves. If those players decide to come off like Linux on the desktop does (where "open"-ness is the main selling point, something utterly irrelevant to people who aren't a particular breed of techie), nobody will care. Nobody ever successfully sold a platform based on its political leanings.
• elorant 13y ago
  So Microsoft just handed the entire Asian manufacturers’ bunch to the Android ecosystem. Not that they’re not already there but it would be hard for any manufacturer now to invest on Windows when they would think that MS is already giving the edge to Nokia. Also this comes like an acceptance from MS that they can’t penetrate the smartphone market. So they prefer to invest heavily on devices they own. Which is a first in their 30+ years of building software. Could this mean a similar approach in tablets? The price though is a bargain. It’s significant less than what Google paid to buy Motorola and Nokia is in a pretty much better state than Motorola in many aspects.
  • rst 13y ago
    To be fair, Google also owns a phone manufacturer (Motorola), also bought on the cheap after a few years of flagging sales. They've managed to keep relationships with other phone manufacturers going despite this, so far, but it is a similar problem. It's conceivable that some of the asian manufacturers might want a foot in each camp (so long as each looked viable at all) just for leverage to use against the other.
    • engrenage 13y ago
      The other manufacturers don't have any alternative but to stay with Google despite Motorola and the tightening noose of Play Services.
      • voltagex_ 13y ago
        Play Services is an absolute win for consumers. How is it a noose for manufacturers?
        • deleted 13y ago
          [deleted]
        • engrenage 13y ago
          It progressively reduces their control over the products they make and hands that ever more over to Google.
• undoware 13y ago
  Here's my take. Nokia's downfall has literally been the biggest business failure in the history of the planet - see communities-dominate.blogs.com for backstory. (As I mentioned in a previous post; I'm largely summarizing things Tomi proves with hard data.) My interpretation of this is that the increasingly untenable position of Stephen Elop began to incriminate the whole board, as any toppling of Elop would invite all sorts of questions as to why he wasn't booted yonks ago. The only way that Microsoft had of avoiding another black eye for Windows was to buy Nokia to appease investors (seriously, how many black eyes can one platform get? Is it a potato?) Consider: Had the headline read, "Microsoft deal destroys World's Leading Manufacturer of Mobile" (which incidentally is the actual, ink-on-paper market position held by Nokia circa Elop's hire, shows Tomi) and it could have destabilized the larger Windows ecosystem too. If this claim seems histrionic, recall that the ENTIRE PC INDUSTRY is like a tenth the size of mobile. Yes, I love my PC too, but most consumers seem much happier with other devices for a wide range of use cases. Therefore, getting Windows on those devices mattered. Windows Phone mattered. Windows RT mattered. Intel is on its back leg, and ARM is about to make its final assault on the server closet, where Windows Server is melting away faster than ice on a VAX. And yet I don't think people realize exactly how vulnerable Microsoft is. The one good thing Ballmer did is notice. Way too late, though. It seems strange to me that there are others who are even less clueful than Ballmer. If your business depends in ANY WAY on Microsoft -- and it probably does -- plan accordingly.
  • pedalpete 13y ago
    We may see the strength in Microsoft server future come from azure, and not from software. Though it is more difficult to get people to try azure over other platforms, I have heard amazing things about it. Personally, I've just always stayed away from Microsoft dev environments, even though I prefer my pc and windows phone to my apple/android variants.
  • nemothekid 13y ago
    Is there a specific post you wanted to highlight on communities-dominate.blogs.com?
    • 13y ago
• shmerl 13y ago
  It was expected all along since Elop ditched Meego which was key to Nokia's success. It won't help Microsoft though, but expect a lot of damage from this. Nokia already attacked VP8 codec with their patents. Now Microsoft will use all Nokia's patents to bring patent trolling to new heights.
  • jmspring 13y ago
    Not sure how not ready, not shipping on devices, no app support makes it "key to success". With that argument sticking to System 40 and System 60 would have made more sense.
    • shmerl 13y ago
      Key to success since it allowed Nokia developing modern and versatile system. Not sure what you meant by no support and not shipping. It was cancelled, obviously. What kind of support do you expect from a cancelled system? Elop cut off that road for Nokia, and their independence was doomed ever since. It was probably the plan all along. It's good that we have Jolla folks now, who continue Meego heritage. But now they will be increasingly threatened by Microsoft trolling.
      • jmspring 13y ago
        Meego wasn't ready to ship, Nokia needed a different OS and Microsoft needed devices. Not ideal for either case, but I don't think a Nokia based on Meego with out the infusion of cash that came in from MSFT would have gone anywhere. Everything one hears about Windows Phone is the "lack of apps". I suspect a system based on Meego would have been a bigger challenge for Nokia than the cash and backing that came from MSFT.
        • shmerl 13y ago
          >Meego wasn't ready to ship, Nokia needed a different OS Nokia had a transition from Maemo to Meego in Harmattan. Harmattan was not only ready to ship, it was shipped! While it was used, Meego could get ready to ship. But Nokia de-facto cancelled it as soon as it came out, since Elop was already in control. Nokia did not need a different OS. MS needed Nokia to say they "need" a different OS. Obviously MS owned one. But Nokia wasn't Microsoft back then. It is now, and MS probably planned that all along.
• ojbyrne 13y ago
  My initial thought was "didn't that already happen?" It's an easy mistake to make.
• bender80 13y ago
  Anyone know price per share? I was not able to find it in the press release.
  • bender80 13y ago
    Nevermind. Nokia itself was not purchased by microsoft. Only part of the company (Devices & Services buinesss) was purchased.
• tlogan 13y ago
  It seems like this will be very interesting fight between Apple, Microsoft, Google, and Samsung in next few years. I assume the first three will do relatively well - the only looser here will be Samsung.
  • sanxiyn 13y ago
    Why do you assume so?
• leaffig 13y ago
  I called this on Friday after looking at the stock market. Too bad I didn't bet too much money on it, but I still made a bunch :) http://stocktwits.com/bluercloud/message/15522482 http://stocktwits.com/bluercloud/message/15522482 http://stocktwits.com/bluercloud/message/15522546 http://stocktwits.com/bluercloud/message/15522546 By the way, this looks like an acquihire for Elop being the next MSFT CEO.
  • RachelF 13y ago
    I wonder who knew?
    • dTal 13y ago
      I love this. Virtually irrefutable evidence of insider trading, and everyone goes "meh".
      • fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
        Happens all the time.
• hiyou102 13y ago
  Nokia Solutions and Networks still makes plenty for money so they aren't dead quite yet. I think this makes sense for Microsoft seeing as how the redesign of Windows phone hasn't made back the money they put into it. It's becoming unprofitable for windows phones to be made so they are ensuring they have hardware.
• joezydeco 13y ago
  Well, at least Qt got warp-core ejected before all of this. God only knows what would have happened in this transaction.
  • aroman 13y ago
    This. Even though I personally throw in with the GTK+ crowd as both a user and developer, the competition between the two camps is definitely good for innovation and makes for strong, compelling alternatives on the Linux desktop.
    • carmackty 13y ago
      "This." This what? What does that mean?
      • bdz 13y ago
        You must be new to the internetz http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=this http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=this
        • joezydeco 13y ago
          Or, like me, you're an internet old timer and just don't understand why people can't just take the time and type "I totally agree".
• alxbrun 13y ago
  1 living dead + 1 living dead = ...
  • nivla 13y ago
    an unproductive comment on HN?
    • alxbrun 13y ago
      at least you're honest with yourself!
• wmt 13y ago
  Nokia was not acquired by MS, Nokia sold them their burning platform, their phone department.
• MichaelMoser123 13y ago
  In Tel Aviv we have the Nokia stadium (that's because Nokia sponsored the reconstruction of the thing); will we now have a Microsoft stadium instead ?
• throwawaykf02 13y ago
  There was some credible speculation back then that Google bought up Mototorola because its CEO threatened patent warfare with other Android manufacturers, something Google really did not want happening. Along similar lines, I speculate that Microsoft snapped up Nokia because they threatened starting an Android line of phones. I think there's a significant business lesson in here somewhere... Something along the lines off "partner with a giant, then become dangerous to it" Funnily enough, MS also gets a nice patent bonus along with its purchase as Google did with Motorola. However, I think Nokia's patent portfolio is much, much more powerful than Motorola's. This is for three reasons, two publicly evident and one anecdotal: 1) Apple admitted defeat in its patent fight with Nokia, something it hasn't done with anybody else; 2) Nokia has multiple patent lawsuits ongoing, and none of them involve standards essential patents, the one thing most likely to invoke the ire of the antitrust gods; 3) A previous boss of mine knew the head of Nokia R&D in America, and he regaled me with stories of smartphone apps they had working in their labs way back in 2006 that made me go "how the hell do they do that?" Unfortunately, any two-bit app developer can do those things today on any modern smartphone platform using publicly documented API. But I am still curious about what goodies they have hidden away in their labs today.
  • Anechoic 13y ago
    I speculate that Microsoft snapped up Nokia because they threatened starting an Android line of phones. Remember that MS makes money off Android phones. MS also gets a nice patent bonus along [..] Apple admitted defeat in its patent fight with Nokia, something it hasn't done with anybody else Apple has (well had but I'd bet dollars to donuts it was renewed) a patent cross-licensing agreement with Microsoft so this could be a win for Apple as well.
    • corresation 13y ago
      Remember that MS makes money off Android phones. Purportedly. I engaged in a debate on here before which involved trying to find the supposedly enormous sums of money that Microsoft makes from Android in their quarterly financial statements. At best it has to amount to what would be chump change to a company like Microsoft. Instead we hear about supposed agreements where vendors who all happen to also be Windows Phone makers pay some unknown sum to Microsoft, which for all we know is used towards their WP licensing. If Nokia released Android phones it would been devastating to Microsoft's mobile platform. It would have ruined it.
• pinaceae 13y ago
  MS paid less for Nokia handset business than for Skype. Oh how the mighty have fallen. Goodbye to the Nokia brand, soon only to be mentioned in rose-tinted lookbacks. Mobile phones, built like a brick, running for days.
  • dagw 13y ago
    Mobile phones, built like a brick, running for days The sad thing is that someone at Nokia seems to have just remembered those days and they've just announced the Nokia 515. A solidly designed aluminium and gorilla glass 'dumb phone' with a 30+ day standby time.
    • sjf 13y ago
      Eh, they've been selling brick phones to literally billions of people in the developing world for years.
      • dagw 13y ago
        But they've been all cheap, ugly and badly built plastic things (I've owned a couple). The 515 is an attempt to see if people are still willing to pay slightly more for a simpler phone if it is good looking and well built.
• plinkplonk 13y ago
  So now the Nokia employees who aren't let go can now experience the pleasures of Microsoft Stack Ranking.
• zmmmmm 13y ago
  Theory: Nokia went to Microsoft and said "we're going Android". This was the (intended) result?
• tlb 13y ago
  The combined company makes a lot of sense and will be well-positioned to compete in mobile, blah blah. I'm sad, because Nokia stood for something: something I generally liked even though I didn't own one. As did Microsoft: something I disliked mildly, but that needed to exist. Now those two brands can't stand for two separate things any more. The combined company will stand for maximizing shareholder value through leveraging synergies, or something. Meanwhile, the iPhone has lost most of its personality, and Ubuntu phone isn't shipping (and it'll be a watery product anyway). Can someone please start a smartphone company to make a phone I care about?
  • asdfs 13y ago
    Jolla might interest you, though I have no idea about their current state.
  • morkbot 13y ago
    Firefox OS might grow up into something serious in a year or two (but that's more of a hope than any prediction).
• general_failure 13y ago
  So, it's lesser than the price for Skype? Wow. This makes no sense to me though. I mean Nokia has a lot more value than Skype!
  • RachelF 13y ago
    Yes, hard to believe they paid more for Skype!
• X-Istence 13y ago
  What does this mean for Qt?
  • taspeotis 13y ago
    What do you expect it to mean? [In March 2011] Nokia announced the sale of Qt's commercial licensing and professional services to Digia [1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_(framework) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_(framework)
    • X-Istence 13y ago
      Nokia is still one of the primary developers behind Qt, or at least they were... has that changed?
      • karinapa 13y ago
        It has changed. A Finnish company called Digia owns Qt completely and is the main developer. That's why Qt is now available even for Android and iPhone. The Nokia-MS deal does not affect Qt.
• fmax30 13y ago
  This was pretty much almost expected. What microsoft did was made nokia very much dependent upon microsoft. Then it buys it, a stroke of genius i tell you.
  • fmax30 13y ago
    Might I know the reason for the DownVote ? I just presented my observation , if you disagree then please by all means let us have a gentleman's discussion.
• rburhum 13y ago
  Among many other things, with this, MS can now compete with Google Maps. Although they already had a partnership with Nokia, having them with a tighter team integration is a different story. I am sure both MS and Google will do drastic innovations with this renewed competition.
• altano 13y ago
  The acquisition does NOT include: - HERE Maps - Nokia NSN (Nokia Siemens Networks, its "network infrastructure") - Advanced Technologies (I couldn't find any info on what this means, given the name)
• aaronsnoswell 13y ago
  Please correct the title on this post - Microsoft is only acquiring the devices and services branch of Nokia - they do have other departments (e.g. mapping).
• rurounijones 13y ago
  Elop: Mission accomplished
• stugs 13y ago
  Cue Snake on Windows RT jokes
• test001only 13y ago
  What would this mean for all the Nokia feature phones ? The latest Asha series was very good and selling pretty well atleast in India. How would this figure in MS strategy? Are they going to ditch it? That would be sad, because Nokia still makes phones that can withstand rough use. On the other side would Nokia start manufacturing Laptop in future. I would really like Nokia design team to come up with a good Windows laptop!
  • abrowne 13y ago
    I'm wondering the same. My main phone now is an Asha 501 — great phone for a light user who wants a small, light device with a long battery life.
• SnowProblem 13y ago
  Seems like it could be a great move, but it raises some questions. Given Microsoft's perspective, they know they need to increase Windows Phone share. The iPhone is on its way to become a niche device, so I doubt they would look to Apple and try to turn Microsoft+Nokia into the one-stop-shop for Windows Phone devices like I've seen speculated in many places. That's too big of a gamble. Instead, I think they'd model after Android, which now has 80% of the market, and continue strong on the OEM route, with Nokia-based devices just acting as a leader. The way I see it, this aligns much better with what's worked historically for Microsoft and what shareholders expect, especially given the Surface blunder. At least I hope so. The problem is that Samsung, HTC and LG are all focused on Android, and Microsoft needs to change that. Can the Nokia buy help with that? I wonder. What would stop Microsoft from using Nokia's patents aggressively (rather than defensively) to "motivate" the other phone manufacturers to produce, market and license more Windows Phone devices, or face additional lawsuits against their majority-Android lines? Nokia alone didn't have the incentive to push to increase WP share outside their lines before, and Microsoft appears to already have a strong patent portfolio for mobile (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone_wars http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone_wars). If so, this deal could be especially sweet for Microsoft, and also could benefit Nokia too, since it would retain premium WP status when a true third ecosystem develops. Thoughts?
• i386 13y ago
  Very interesting, since Stephen Elop was tipped to replace Ballmer after his departure. I think the real coup is the access to the dumb phone market in places like Africa and India where Nokia is strong today but where their growing middle class will want to move to smart phones over the next 10 years.
• faddotio 13y ago
  CEO reverse acquisition? Elop 4 MS CEO 2014?
• ommunist 13y ago
  The fall of giant. A domino effect may result in Samsung buying Microsoft in 3-5 years.
• dotcoma 13y ago
  For less money than they spent on Skype.
• RomP 13y ago
  Once more we marvel the prophecy of this designer: http://stocklogos.com/topic/past-and-future-famous-logos http://stocklogos.com/topic/past-and-future-famous-logos First he predicted next Microsoft logo, now Nokia. Bravo!
• lsc 13y ago
  It is a sad day. I have been joking with friends that we should have a funeral in sunnyvale. Probably, though, that would be in poor taste. On the upside for nokia shareholders, well, when nokia switched to windows phone, it was widely reported that "Microsoft bought Nokia for zero dollars" - now, at least, the Nokia shareholders are getting paid for it.
• milesf 13y ago
  So a has-been has been acquired by another has-been. Together they will unseat the Apple/Google juggernaut by beating IOS/Android. No, I don't believe it either.
• jcrei 13y ago
  The old fat couple in the room had a dance and microsoft just ran out of things to say, so in order to avoid an awkward moment (high end sales are abysmal) he proposed. nokia looked around, didn't want to die alone, and like any scared middle aged woman, said yes.
• marcamillion 13y ago
  Why would MSFT highlight the fact that the cash is coming from overseas in the PR? Is there a tax benefit to doing something like that? Specifically: Under the terms of the agreement, Microsoft will pay EUR 3.79 billion to purchase substantially all of Nokia’s Devices & Services business, and EUR 1.65 billion to license Nokia’s patents, for a total transaction price of EUR 5.44 billion in cash. Microsoft will draw upon its overseas cash resources to fund the transaction. http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/press/2013/Sep13/09-02AnnouncementPR.aspx http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/press/2013/Sep13/09-02An...
  • sseveran 13y ago
    It doesn't have to pay US taxes on money overseas to fund the transaction.
    • marcamillion 13y ago
      That's interesting.
• karthikeyahegde 13y ago
  Ohh my GOD... now MS introduces the bugs, not only in OS, it will be in phone HardWare also.
• itsbits 13y ago
  PLease microsoft..just make Visual Studio free and you will lead mobile market in no time..
  • maybe_someday 13y ago
    They already have a free version for creating WP apps.
• Nux 13y ago
  What a tragic end to the sad story of Nokia. It was a long time coming now, but I'm still gobsmacked. Looking back it's as if Elop and whoever his puppeteer is did all they could to undermine this company. Sold to Microsoft for bits. Even Motorola sold for twice as much. Nokia would have made money from Android. The market is massive and still growing. There is no bright future with Microsoft. People don't buy or recommend Windows phone, not at a rate that matters they don't. What a sad day. Farewell, Nokia.
• doe88 13y ago
  Nokia 7.2bn$ Skype 8.5bn$ I think, it is reasonnable to say it seems to be a better move this time.
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• patrikr 13y ago
  The title is wrong. Nokia is not being acquired, it's selling the phone business.
• sirkneeland 13y ago
  As a Nokia employee, I can't yet comment on whether this is ultimately good or bad for us and what our dreams were. I can say that it is a very emotional time for us Nokia employees, and I can only imagine it is even more so for those of us who are also Finns.
• JoachimS 13y ago
  This is a great move - for Nokia. Now Nokia has a huge pile of money to take on Huawei, Ericsson and Cisco etc in the mobile network field. Remember, Nokia bought out Siemens from NSN as recent as July this year: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-06-30/nokia-said-to-agree-to-buy-siemens-stake-in-nsn-networks-venture http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-06-30/nokia-said-to-ag... With the money from the MS deal, the headache of a failing mobile phone business while retaining the patents and maps I think Nokia will be in a much better position witch a clearer focus.
• JoachimS 13y ago
  The deal is also very interesting as it clearly points to what the board of MS sees as the future - to truly become a device vendor. They have had success with Xbox, but failed with Zune and first generation Surface. Can they really transform MS into a prosperous device company while not alienating their partners and affect their core enterprise SW business? I have my doubts and that they don't acquire the patents, just license them makes their position imho much weaker. Also, the new Nokia feature phone, will it even appear on the market now before being killed?
• ville 13y ago
  Nowadays I measure acquisitions in Instagrams. At $7.2B Nokia cost Microsoft ~7 Instagrams. That sounds crazy when you think that Instagram had 13 employees, compared to 30000 employees moving to Microsoft from Nokia.
• DominikR 13y ago
  To me, this is borderline criminal behaviour and shows once more that Microsoft is incapable of playing fair. Installing a trojan horse as Nokias CEO, who then proceeds to destroy any value left in that company so that Microsoft can pick it up for a cheap price. I'd be amazed if Elop is promoted to MS's CEO position for such deceitful behaviour
  • itry 13y ago
    Interesting theory. Might indeed have been a plan. Microsoft was afraid that no hw manufacturer needed their os anymore. So they decided to build their own hardware. Fast way: Buy an exisiting Phone manufacturer.
  • general_failure 13y ago
    I don't think elop was a Trojan horse, I don't think any of this was preplanned. But I do think elop is a weasel and a scum and it would be seriously disgusting to have him as Microsoft CEO. He did a gross disservice to nokia and nobody I know has any iota of respect for him. He has no leadership qualities whatsoever. In fact, he is what you call a corporate whore. He pleases others and wins favors. Like now he has done ms a favor and they will make him CEO.
    • yulaow 13y ago
      I would prefer to say that the Board of nokia is gone full retard hiring him as ceo. OR they knew since the start that M$ was gonna buying them.
  • buster 13y ago
    I think the exact same thing... - get ex MS employee to be Nokia CEO - fire lots of Nokia employees - run the company down - buy Nokia, hire ex MS employee to run that part It's a shame, i never had a Nokia, but the featurephones atleast have been decent hardware and quality. They haven't been marketleader for nothing.. Oh, and by the way, the next step will be: - buy all Nokia patents (if they haven't as well) - sue rest of the market Nokia must be sitting on a huge pile of relevant mobile and networking patents (although the networking stuff may stay with NSN).
• crucialfelix 13y ago
  This also probably means that Nokias very good map technology will now merge into or replace Bing's.
• meerita 13y ago
  If you think this gonna bring better phones, with better OSs, you're wrong. Look back into the history of these companies.
• ulfw 13y ago
  7.2 Billion USD for Nokia sounds like a much better deal to me than 12.5 B for Motorola. Kudos to MSFT on finally making that move!
• dodyg 13y ago
  iPhone destroyed Microsoft, BlackBerry and Nokia high end smartphone products. Android crushed the rest. End of story.
• deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
• caberus 13y ago
  maybe it sounds irrelevant, but always i wonder that, why Nokia pays less attention to Linux, a Finnish company and an OS born in Finland? Only a few Nokia devices run some kind of Linux and i think they are not so bad (my favorite is N9, btw).
• caberus 13y ago
  this makes Elop the most dangerous trojan horse of all times
• JoachimS 13y ago
  Here is the Microsoft Strategic Rationale presetation: http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.microsoft.com%2Fen-us%2Fnews%2Fdownload%2Fpress%2F2013%2FStrategicRationale.pdf&h=gAQFbuiSc http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.microsoft.c...
• mathattack 13y ago
  Expensive signing bonus to pick up their new CEO?
• thspimpolds 13y ago
  Well, RIM is now RIP. Microsoft was their last hope
• dmead 13y ago
  "hi everybody, i'm bill gates. buy this phone and 15 dollars will go to support malaria research".... is what i want to see on tv.
• ghshephard 13y ago
  Clearly Elop agreeing on the acquisition by Microsoft was contingent on Ballmer resigning from Microsoft, Setting Elop up as the next CEO of Microsoft. So, not only was Ballmer fired, his replacement has likely already been chosen.
• moron4hire 13y ago
  Actually, I'd be really interested to see if Microkia could pull it off, could make an awesome phone that seriously challenged the iOS/Android hegemony. I think they have the resources to be able to do it in a way that Mozilla or Ubuntu or any other strictly software/no experience in hardware company could do. And if Microsoft can reinvent itself and snatch victory out of this, then that means the market is actually wide open. Ultimately, I'd like to see a true, open source, Linux phone, and Microsoft quite ironically could do a lot to prove that one could be successful. In other words, Microsoft gets to take chances that anyone else gets to learn from. More competition is a good thing.
• rbanffy 13y ago
  ... and this is the part I say "I told you so". Elop never really left Microsoft. All he did at Nokia's helm was to trim down the company to facilitate this acquisition.
• gpvos 13y ago
  > Nokia Windows Phones the fastest-growing smartphones in the world Huh?
• arkj 13y ago
  Ballmer trumps his critics. Well done - Sir. There is a lot of potential to eat from both iPhone and Android cakes. Android needs a beefy h/w, c'mon guys let's admit it. Windows is way faster even on the low-end lumias. Also don't forget MS Office - the sleeping giant on windows phones. History likes to repeat itself. First Jobs wouldn't licence MacOS, and Billy rode the wave he created. Then google got the second wave. Why? The same reason, he wouldn't license iOS. From a user perspective iOS is the best, but the new Lumias makes me think of Apollo as no less great. No matter what google does, lumia will eat big from Android's share. But I waiting to see how big a bite it's gonna be on the apple. In the enterprise world Office on Phones is gonna pay a big role. This is death toll for blackberry, sorry to say that. C'mon Cook, partner on. Let others make "cheap" apples. License iOS before it's too late.
• forgottenpaswrd 13y ago
  I hate to say that, but I told you so! :-D More than two or more years ago, I wrote in different places, and probably in HN that when Microsoft partners he is always the winner, and the other is the looser, and that Microsoft was going to buy Nokia at a discount in the future. History repeats itself.
• mcintyre1994 13y ago
  It'll be interesting to see what happens with Windows Phone from here. As far as I know, nobody except Nokia was doing 'better' with WP than Android, and didn't seem to be putting much effort into it really. I imagine they might be further deterred by Microsoft buying the dominant manufacturer too. This seems to put all the momentum of WP with Microsoft, and it seems like the only real place to go from here is competing with the iPhone/iOS head on.
• tytso 13y ago
  One thing which I haven't seen anyone mention yet. Nokia, like Skype, was a non-US company, which means Microsoft could use cash which is trapped in Europe. So you have to take the purchase price and discount it by as much as the US Corporate tax rate (which Microsoft would have to pay if the money was going to be repatriated back to the States, as would be needed if that cash was going to be used to pay dividends or to purchase a company based in the US).
  • simba-hiiipower 13y ago
    yeah, in one of their releases they specifically mention the transaction will be completed using offshore funds. and while i'd generally like to see some movement on policy to encourage large us-based multinationals to bring-home more of their offshore earnings (for reinvestment domestically), the current environment does play-out nicely for foreign m&a - which is at-least (in my opinion) a better use of funds than dividends and buybacks.
    • shubb 13y ago
      Money from work and sales outside the US should be repatriated and invested domestically, just because the company is notionally based in the US? Sounds a tad imperialistic? I think getting companies pay tax in the US for sales in the US would be less internationally antisocial...
      • phillmv 13y ago
        >I think getting companies pay tax in the US for sales in the US would be less internationally antisocial... IIRC, that's precisely not what these tax repatriations are about; they're about sales abroad that are received by a foreign subsidiary. They avoid repatriating it back to the (US-based) parent company because they suspect if they hold onto it long enough the US government will issue yet-another tax holiday.
      • WildUtah 13y ago
        Remember that no other developed country besides the USA requires that local companies pay local tax again on foreign profits already taxed where they are earned. Most nations recognize that that would make investing locally costly and undesirable. It would also put local companies at a competitive disadvantage worldwide. The politics of government greed in the USA has created a tax system where the USA government charges the highest business tax rates in the world and enforces punitive triple taxation of foreign profits. That's why USA companies are keeping their money abroad instead of investing in jobs at home. (The USA tax rate was second in the world until a recent Japanese reform, but Japan never triple taxed profits abroad, so the Japanese rate was always effectively lower.) Corporate taxation is one of the few tax issues where Congressional Republicans are often more sensible than Democrats, from a purely technical tax policy perspective. Obama is willing to work with them, too, but nothing seems to get done. It's one small part of the ongoing failure of Washington.
• jaakl 13y ago
  This title is here more than 50% wrong. Microsoft bought Devices and Services business, and large portion of patents. This is about 50% of Nokia revenues, less than 50% of employees, and about 0% of the profits.
• hauget 13y ago
  Always loved #Nokia's design but hated their sw. One of my favorite designed phones EVER will always be the E71 http://bit.ly/14nbnC7 http://bit.ly/14nbnC7 On that note, Microsoft should buy Blackberry too. Nokia design & hardware +WinPhone8 software +Blackberry's customers might be a winning combination.
• st2p 13y ago
  Misleading title - Microsoft acquired the handset division; Nokia lives on in infrastructure and maps.
• kailuowang 13y ago
  Ballmer confirms what we all knew: Elop candidate for Microsoft CEO job http://www.engadget.com/2013/09/03/microlop/ http://www.engadget.com/2013/09/03/microlop/
• niuzeta 13y ago
  I wonder if it's the last present Ballmer left to whoever succeeds him, or the last spat.
• AndrewDucker 13y ago
  What does this mean for Nokia's remaining feature-phone business? I was under the impression that there was still a global market for people wanting cheap, low-function, phones.
  • mrweasel 13y ago
    I was thinking the same thing. What is Microsoft going to do with that part of the business, that's the part that's doing well. Nokias feature phones are still huge in Africa and large parts of Asia. If Microsoft is just going to ignore that part of the business, then they are opening the marked for the competitors. If they just bought Nokia for their smartphone, then they are making a giant mistake.
    • mongol 13y ago
      I think they will operate it as long as it runs a decent profit.
• shaaaaawn 13y ago
  Microsoft recently sent me a Nokia Lumia 820.1 (developer edition) for App dev / test purposes. I have to say after playing around with it, I'm thoroughly impressed. The app store is obviously significantly deficient, but one item of note is that Nokia has developed a lot of Apps they built in house that are actually worth using, especially for photography. The rest of the phone is on par with my iPhone 4S but plays better with my Windows ecosystem. I'd buy a future edition. Disclaimer: I'm naturally biased as Windows 8 is already the platform I use for my dev machine, laptop, and HTPC.
• cevaris 13y ago
  damn. would have really like to see an Nokia based android phone.
• cevaris 13y ago
  damn. would have really like to see an Nokia based android phone.
• vmarsy 13y ago
  All the other comments are too focused on the front-end Nokia Lumia vs iPhone vs Android. Microsoft buying Nokia is kind of the same as Google buying Motorola for 12 billion $ : Nokia has 10k patents in the mobile phone world. So a 10-year license to its patents has its importance
  • sharpneli 13y ago
    That pretty much means that the biggest owner of patents for mobiles does not manufacture them anymore. Thus the mutually assured destruction does not hinder them anymore. I'm not surprised if we'll see a bunch of patent lawsuits against everyone else except Microsoft within an year.
• j45 13y ago
  Anyone else see this and think of their Nokian Tyres? Nokia has an interesting history, including owning Nokian which makes some very good winter tires.
• TerraHertz 13y ago
  Now we find out if Failure has a critical mass.
• stefek99 13y ago
  If you wonder how the market reacted: http://nokiastock.tumblr.com/post/60266789816/here-the-answer-comes http://nokiastock.tumblr.com/post/60266789816/here-the-answe...
• AliaksandrH 13y ago
  I feel like there are fundamental problems with MSFT (or INTC)succeeding in the mobile world After the platform wars of 90s, the industry has scars (70% of economics went to two vendors - MSFT and INTC - Wintel)and would not want any potential repeat of the history In many ways, ARM Holdings is anti-Intel. Same way, one can claim that Android is anti-Windows model (in many respects) I am really curious what will happen here - and who are people in U.S. who still don't own a smartphone? (still 39% of the population - http://mashable.com/2013/06/06/smartphones-61-percent/ http://mashable.com/2013/06/06/smartphones-61-percent/)