5 ms·

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 platfo

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
miguelrochefort 13y ago
> ... which would solve the app problem for the otherwise fantastic Nokia hardware ... The number of app on Windows Phone is no longer a problem. There are more than 240,000 Windows Phone apps as we speak.
- JaakkoP 13y ago
  It's not just about the quantity, but quality as well. Many of the major apps such as Uber, Lyft and Venmo are still missing, and the app store is still largely a joke with the hottest apps arriving significantly late - if ever. As a Finn and a Nokia phone owner, I'd love the company to succeed. I'm just puzzled about the level of arrogance they still showcase, as if they know best what customers "should" want. For example, I visited Nokia offices past spring and a very senior level executive told to a group of developers and I how he doesn't understand why people even need apps like Instagram and "Chat Snap App" [sic] when the Nokia apps work just as fine or better.
- MichaelGG 13y ago
  While I don't care much about "app counts", the Windows Store is ... laughably bad. Common searches return tons of trademark violations, and obvious crap apps. Ugly junk. The "number" was never a problem, and by optimizing for that metric, MS made their store into a gross place. A joke, as another comment puts it.
Mister_Snuggles 13y ago
> after all, porting your apps from standard Android to an AOSP fork is easier than than porting it to Windows Phone So is this REALLY Android if you need to port your applications to run on it? How much of what makes an Android phone Android is AOSP and how much is the Google services that sit on top of it?
- mdwrigh2 13y ago
  This isn't necessarily Google services vs. AOSP. Since they aren't going through certification there's no guarantee they've gone through CTS tests (so they APIs may differ from stock Android, either in signature or functionality).
  - Mister_Snuggles 13y ago
    So it sounds like we have two Androids on the market now: Certified Android and not-quite-Android-but-still-mostly-Android.
    - mdwrigh2 13y ago
      No, there's one Android: the one certified by CTS and conforming to the CDD. You aren't allowed to use the name Android to describe your device without being certified as "Android-compatible". From the FAQ on source.android.com: "Is compatibility mandatory? No. The Android Compatibility Program is optional. Since the Android source code is open, anyone can use it to build any kind of device. However, if manufacturers wish to use the Android name with their products, or want access to Google Play, they must first demonstrate their devices are compatible."
CurtHagenlocher 13y ago
> It could be a classic Microsoft embrace/extend/extinguish move. The rules governing mergers actually prohibit Microsoft and Nokia from strategizing that kind of thing together until the merger is complete.
- w1ntermute 13y ago
  Microsoft's never been a stickler for the rules.
rch 13y ago
This is more about going after volume with Android and leaving Windows Phone to compete with iOS for the high-end market. But I guess that is exactly embrace/extend/extinguish except applied directly to the Android brand, which makes more sense than turning the screws on devs with constant platform headaches.

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

miguelrochefort 13y ago

> ... which would solve the app problem for the otherwise fantastic Nokia hardware ... The number of app on Windows Phone is no longer a problem. There are more than 240,000 Windows Phone apps as we speak.

JaakkoP 13y ago
It's not just about the quantity, but quality as well. Many of the major apps such as Uber, Lyft and Venmo are still missing, and the app store is still largely a joke with the hottest apps arriving significantly late - if ever. As a Finn and a Nokia phone owner, I'd love the company to succeed. I'm just puzzled about the level of arrogance they still showcase, as if they know best what customers "should" want. For example, I visited Nokia offices past spring and a very senior level executive told to a group of developers and I how he doesn't understand why people even need apps like Instagram and "Chat Snap App" [sic] when the Nokia apps work just as fine or better.
MichaelGG 13y ago
While I don't care much about "app counts", the Windows Store is ... laughably bad. Common searches return tons of trademark violations, and obvious crap apps. Ugly junk. The "number" was never a problem, and by optimizing for that metric, MS made their store into a gross place. A joke, as another comment puts it.

Mister_Snuggles 13y ago

> after all, porting your apps from standard Android to an AOSP fork is easier than than porting it to Windows Phone So is this REALLY Android if you need to port your applications to run on it? How much of what makes an Android phone Android is AOSP and how much is the Google services that sit on top of it?

mdwrigh2 13y ago
This isn't necessarily Google services vs. AOSP. Since they aren't going through certification there's no guarantee they've gone through CTS tests (so they APIs may differ from stock Android, either in signature or functionality).
- Mister_Snuggles 13y ago
  So it sounds like we have two Androids on the market now: Certified Android and not-quite-Android-but-still-mostly-Android.
  - mdwrigh2 13y ago
    No, there's one Android: the one certified by CTS and conforming to the CDD. You aren't allowed to use the name Android to describe your device without being certified as "Android-compatible". From the FAQ on source.android.com: "Is compatibility mandatory? No. The Android Compatibility Program is optional. Since the Android source code is open, anyone can use it to build any kind of device. However, if manufacturers wish to use the Android name with their products, or want access to Google Play, they must first demonstrate their devices are compatible."

CurtHagenlocher 13y ago

> It could be a classic Microsoft embrace/extend/extinguish move. The rules governing mergers actually prohibit Microsoft and Nokia from strategizing that kind of thing together until the merger is complete.

w1ntermute 13y ago
Microsoft's never been a stickler for the rules.

rch 13y ago

This is more about going after volume with Android and leaving Windows Phone to compete with iOS for the high-end market. But I guess that is exactly embrace/extend/extinguish except applied directly to the Android brand, which makes more sense than turning the screws on devs with constant platform headaches.