9 ms·

Ars Technica [1] put it best. These phones are dead on arrival. This is not the first time Nokia has done something like this. It released a Meego ver

Ars Technica [1] put it best. These phones are dead on arrival. This is not the first time Nokia has done something like this. It released a Meego version of the N9, its long-in-development Symbian successor, before immediately abandoning the platform and switching to Windows Phone. This isn't a sign of some deep strategy. It's just standard Nokia platform craziness. 1: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/02/nokia-to-release-an-android-phone-this-month/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/02/nokia-to-release-an-a...

Aoyagi 13y ago
MeeGo was a) successor of Maemo on N900 (and other devices) and b) abandoned, because "burning bridges".
- cdooh 13y ago
  It was abandoned because "internal politics"
  - Aoyagi 13y ago
    Funny how those internal politics are internal only now that MS bought Nokia, isn't it?
    - hatu 13y ago
      Nokia's got a long history of internal turf wars. I'm sure it was Symbian vs Meego without Microsoft being in the picture.
    - cdooh 13y ago
      The all powerful, at the time anyway, Symbian team didn't like competition and did everything they could to muck up Maemo/Meego development.
- sirkneeland 13y ago
  "burning platform" not "burning bridges" (although the number of bridges burned between Nokia leadership and employees, suppliers, developers, distributors/retailers and carriers was nothing short of astonishing. And catastrophic).
Fuxy 13y ago
Well the idea was good the implementation sucks as usual. Android without the play store is not as useful or flexible and you can't compete with other budget phones which do have the play store so you're shooting yourself in the foot. As log as there's an easy way for end users to put it on it shouldn't be such a big deal though. What I suspect they are attempting to do is get back into the low budget phone market which they used to rule before they stupidly gave it up voluntarily and the only reason they are using Android is because it's the only one suitable for that hardware however this is not the old low end market they used to know. Before it used to be acceptable to have only a few crap apps for phones but now even the low budget phones have access to the play store. I wonder if they will make it with this self inflicted handicap.
- annnnd 13y ago
  They have no option here - using Google's app store comes with severe attachments that Microsoft is not likely to accept. My guess is that they are aiming at lower end of market where the price is important, and betting on developers to port their apps. Which could actually happen if porting is not a big issue. OTOH, Google is putting more and more stuff in closed source part of OS, so the platforms will inevitably diverge. It might be a bit late for Nokia to do this... we'll see.
- gebe 13y ago
  They have already proven that WP can run on low spec hardware though with the Lumia 520. It's also a 1GHz, 512MB RAM device.
  - vetinari 13y ago
    Lumia 520 has MSM8227, it is not that low end. It is dual core Snapdragon S4 with Adreno 305. Nexus 7 (2013) is not that much powerful.
- miguelrochefort 13y ago
  You can already get a brand new and unlocked Windows Phone for less than $100. Microsoft is already winning the low-end battle.
antimagic 13y ago
I wouldn't be so quick to discount this move. It could be a classic Microsoft embrace/extend/extinguish move. They lost the first round on mobile phone platforms, but this would allow them to very quickly create a platform that has developer support - after all, porting your apps from standard Android to an AOSP fork is easier than than porting it to Windows Phone. Especially as Microsoft/Nokia is pretty much the only organisation on the planet at the moment apart from Google and Apple that is capable of offering all of the same services that stock Android provides, making porting even easier for app developers. The latest Android look and feel is not so different from Windows Phone either, once you actually get into the app. You could imagine a "Windows Phone" homescreen skin with Android Apps behind it, and it would be really quite a decent merger of the two environments, graphically speaking. If they throw a bit of money around to encourage developers to undertake the (hopefully) relatively simple task of porting from stock Android, it's not impossible that they manage to get a pretty decent App Store together, which would solve the app problem for the otherwise fantastic Nokia hardware that they have been making these last few years. Anyway, there's a lot of conditionals in the stuff that I've just written, none of it may come to pass, I'm just saying that it would be unwise to dismiss this effort without at least waiting a bit to see how it pans out.
- css771 13y ago
  Nokia is actually discouraging devs from using Windows Phone design patterns and encouraging Android design guidelines on the Nokia X. http://developer.nokia.com/resources/library/nokia-x-ui/ux-checklist.html http://developer.nokia.com/resources/library/nokia-x-ui/ux-c...
  - jmspring 13y ago
    Design patterns for one platform make sense that they are downplayed where they don't fit. Me ego was downplayed as WP came along, part of the game. That said, this seems like an evolution of the saga low end line rather than the high end devices... Simply look at the cameras.
- SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
  > I wouldn't be so quick to discount this move. It could be a classic Microsoft embrace/extend/extinguish move. Except, unless I'm mistaken, MS doesn't actually own Nokia yet. "On 2 September 2013, Microsoft announced its intent to purchase Nokia's mobile phone business unit" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia
josefresco 13y ago
So Nokia kills one platform/smartphone in the recent past and that means that this new line of phones is doomed? How are the two events linked? I don't see a connection. Products are born and killed everyday, just because company X has killed product Y in the past, doesn't mean that every future product will be killed in the same manor. Also, N9 was an internally developed OS that was late, and Nokia was suffering. Axing something that is eating massive resources for an external vendor isn't in any way similar to Nokia introducing a low-cost alternative to their existing high end offerings.
- sp332 13y ago
  Microsoft is about to buy Nokia. No way they're going to continue development of an Android phone.
  - Nilzor 13y ago
    huh? they already own Nokia
    - melling 13y ago
      No, they don't. http://techcrunch.com/2014/02/14/the-nokia-microsoft-deal-is-still-a-go-for-q1/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/02/14/the-nokia-microsoft-deal-is...
  - easy_rider 13y ago
    http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/12/5404098/microsoft-considering-android-apps-on-windows http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/12/5404098/microsoft-consider...
  - josefresco 13y ago
    Was this initiative started before or after the MS acquisition was planned and announced? While technically MS might not own them yet, it seems they have already built their product offerings around this partnership (and for some time now). Which would make the comparison to the internal N9 project being killed in favor of a new platform not as relevant. This seems to me as a plan hatched after Nokia got into bed with MS as a plan to diversify.
ZeroGravitas 13y ago
They kind of have to say that though, the same author wrote this: "While Android is open, it's more of a "look but don't touch" kind of open. You're allowed to contribute to Android and allowed to use it for little hobbies, but in nearly every area, the deck is stacked against anyone trying to use Android without Google's blessing. The second you try to take Android and do something that Google doesn't approve of, it will bring the world crashing down upon you." And his colleague wrote an article titled: "Neither Microsoft, Nokia, nor anyone else should fork Android. It’s unforkable." So they'd look a bit silly writing about this in any other way. Maybe it will get canned, but then before today I would have said that it was only for internal purposes, so scare Microsoft into buying them. Turns out I was wrong, and they went public with it.
- eropple 13y ago
  I wouldn't read too much into that. I'll say a lot of things about Peter, but he's not exactly afraid to admit he's wrong.
- lnanek2 13y ago
  They are kind of right. These phones are worthless in the US market or any high end market due to lack of Google Play. And that's where the profit margins are. Samsung is really the only player with enough vertical integration and scale to profit on the low end devices. Nokia is one of the very few vendors who can provide a competent maps app without Google Maps, but they are still producing a failure here due to not kissing Google's ring.
sirkneeland 13y ago
That's not the proper chronology. Nokia announced they were abandoning Symbian/MeeGo for Windows Phone BEFORE announcing and releasing the N9.

Aoyagi 13y ago

MeeGo was a) successor of Maemo on N900 (and other devices) and b) abandoned, because "burning bridges".

cdooh 13y ago
It was abandoned because "internal politics"
- Aoyagi 13y ago
  Funny how those internal politics are internal only now that MS bought Nokia, isn't it?
  - hatu 13y ago
    Nokia's got a long history of internal turf wars. I'm sure it was Symbian vs Meego without Microsoft being in the picture.
  - cdooh 13y ago
    The all powerful, at the time anyway, Symbian team didn't like competition and did everything they could to muck up Maemo/Meego development.
sirkneeland 13y ago
"burning platform" not "burning bridges" (although the number of bridges burned between Nokia leadership and employees, suppliers, developers, distributors/retailers and carriers was nothing short of astonishing. And catastrophic).

Fuxy 13y ago

Well the idea was good the implementation sucks as usual. Android without the play store is not as useful or flexible and you can't compete with other budget phones which do have the play store so you're shooting yourself in the foot. As log as there's an easy way for end users to put it on it shouldn't be such a big deal though. What I suspect they are attempting to do is get back into the low budget phone market which they used to rule before they stupidly gave it up voluntarily and the only reason they are using Android is because it's the only one suitable for that hardware however this is not the old low end market they used to know. Before it used to be acceptable to have only a few crap apps for phones but now even the low budget phones have access to the play store. I wonder if they will make it with this self inflicted handicap.

annnnd 13y ago
They have no option here - using Google's app store comes with severe attachments that Microsoft is not likely to accept. My guess is that they are aiming at lower end of market where the price is important, and betting on developers to port their apps. Which could actually happen if porting is not a big issue. OTOH, Google is putting more and more stuff in closed source part of OS, so the platforms will inevitably diverge. It might be a bit late for Nokia to do this... we'll see.
gebe 13y ago
They have already proven that WP can run on low spec hardware though with the Lumia 520. It's also a 1GHz, 512MB RAM device.
- vetinari 13y ago
  Lumia 520 has MSM8227, it is not that low end. It is dual core Snapdragon S4 with Adreno 305. Nexus 7 (2013) is not that much powerful.
miguelrochefort 13y ago
You can already get a brand new and unlocked Windows Phone for less than $100. Microsoft is already winning the low-end battle.

antimagic 13y ago

I wouldn't be so quick to discount this move. It could be a classic Microsoft embrace/extend/extinguish move. They lost the first round on mobile phone platforms, but this would allow them to very quickly create a platform that has developer support - after all, porting your apps from standard Android to an AOSP fork is easier than than porting it to Windows Phone. Especially as Microsoft/Nokia is pretty much the only organisation on the planet at the moment apart from Google and Apple that is capable of offering all of the same services that stock Android provides, making porting even easier for app developers. The latest Android look and feel is not so different from Windows Phone either, once you actually get into the app. You could imagine a "Windows Phone" homescreen skin with Android Apps behind it, and it would be really quite a decent merger of the two environments, graphically speaking. If they throw a bit of money around to encourage developers to undertake the (hopefully) relatively simple task of porting from stock Android, it's not impossible that they manage to get a pretty decent App Store together, which would solve the app problem for the otherwise fantastic Nokia hardware that they have been making these last few years. Anyway, there's a lot of conditionals in the stuff that I've just written, none of it may come to pass, I'm just saying that it would be unwise to dismiss this effort without at least waiting a bit to see how it pans out.

css771 13y ago
Nokia is actually discouraging devs from using Windows Phone design patterns and encouraging Android design guidelines on the Nokia X. http://developer.nokia.com/resources/library/nokia-x-ui/ux-checklist.html http://developer.nokia.com/resources/library/nokia-x-ui/ux-c...
- jmspring 13y ago
  Design patterns for one platform make sense that they are downplayed where they don't fit. Me ego was downplayed as WP came along, part of the game. That said, this seems like an evolution of the saga low end line rather than the high end devices... Simply look at the cameras.
SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
> I wouldn't be so quick to discount this move. It could be a classic Microsoft embrace/extend/extinguish move. Except, unless I'm mistaken, MS doesn't actually own Nokia yet. "On 2 September 2013, Microsoft announced its intent to purchase Nokia's mobile phone business unit" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia

josefresco 13y ago

So Nokia kills one platform/smartphone in the recent past and that means that this new line of phones is doomed? How are the two events linked? I don't see a connection. Products are born and killed everyday, just because company X has killed product Y in the past, doesn't mean that every future product will be killed in the same manor. Also, N9 was an internally developed OS that was late, and Nokia was suffering. Axing something that is eating massive resources for an external vendor isn't in any way similar to Nokia introducing a low-cost alternative to their existing high end offerings.

sp332 13y ago
Microsoft is about to buy Nokia. No way they're going to continue development of an Android phone.
- Nilzor 13y ago
  huh? they already own Nokia
  - melling 13y ago
    No, they don't. http://techcrunch.com/2014/02/14/the-nokia-microsoft-deal-is-still-a-go-for-q1/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/02/14/the-nokia-microsoft-deal-is...
- easy_rider 13y ago
  http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/12/5404098/microsoft-considering-android-apps-on-windows http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/12/5404098/microsoft-consider...
- josefresco 13y ago
  Was this initiative started before or after the MS acquisition was planned and announced? While technically MS might not own them yet, it seems they have already built their product offerings around this partnership (and for some time now). Which would make the comparison to the internal N9 project being killed in favor of a new platform not as relevant. This seems to me as a plan hatched after Nokia got into bed with MS as a plan to diversify.

ZeroGravitas 13y ago

They kind of have to say that though, the same author wrote this: "While Android is open, it's more of a "look but don't touch" kind of open. You're allowed to contribute to Android and allowed to use it for little hobbies, but in nearly every area, the deck is stacked against anyone trying to use Android without Google's blessing. The second you try to take Android and do something that Google doesn't approve of, it will bring the world crashing down upon you." And his colleague wrote an article titled: "Neither Microsoft, Nokia, nor anyone else should fork Android. It’s unforkable." So they'd look a bit silly writing about this in any other way. Maybe it will get canned, but then before today I would have said that it was only for internal purposes, so scare Microsoft into buying them. Turns out I was wrong, and they went public with it.

eropple 13y ago
I wouldn't read too much into that. I'll say a lot of things about Peter, but he's not exactly afraid to admit he's wrong.
lnanek2 13y ago
They are kind of right. These phones are worthless in the US market or any high end market due to lack of Google Play. And that's where the profit margins are. Samsung is really the only player with enough vertical integration and scale to profit on the low end devices. Nokia is one of the very few vendors who can provide a competent maps app without Google Maps, but they are still producing a failure here due to not kissing Google's ring.

sirkneeland 13y ago

That's not the proper chronology. Nokia announced they were abandoning Symbian/MeeGo for Windows Phone BEFORE announcing and releasing the N9.