11 ms·

Microsoft to release Android-powered Nokia X2 handset

168 points by madradavid 12y ago

Piskvorrr 12y ago
Embrace, extend, ... But seriously: I'm very curious to see where this goes. Perhaps a way of running Android apps on Win phones? That would be a tremendous boost.
DigitalSea 12y ago
Hell has officially frozen over. Seriously though. This is great news, good to see that Microsoft is opening themselves up. Whether or not this is because of the new leadership, it's definitely the step in the right direction for Microsoft.
- BuckRogers 12y ago
  Just business tactic, not 'opening up'.
tyrionaura 12y ago
Earlier Nokia X handsets did actually run Android too, so this move isn't that much unexpected.
- lucaspiller 12y ago
  I'm not sure how this differs from them as it has exactly the same interface. Unless it comes with Google Play? I've got a dual SIM version of the Nokia X and it's about as bad as you imagine it to be. Side loading Google Play helped, but it's still not great. The Moto G is a much better investment.
lcnmrn 12y ago
They could get Android apps working on Windows Phone OS, rather than this. Microsoft is useless these days.
- morganvachon 12y ago
  I doubt that will ever happen, and I hope it doesn't. I'd much prefer to see proper ports of Android and iOS apps, rather than some Frankenstein style compatibility layer.
- seabrookmx 12y ago
  Blackberry tried this. Even on QNX, which is a POSIX OS, it took significant amounts of work and last I checked was still pretty buggy. Sailfish has had much better luck, no doubt due to running on top of the Linux kernel however.
_pmf_ 12y ago
Nokia. The fact that Nokia belongs to Microsoft is immaterial here. It's a Nokia phone.
- higherpurpose 12y ago
  Nokia doesn't belong to Microsoft. Nokia's phone division belongs to Microsoft. I imagine the actual Nokia company will begin selling Android phones in a couple of years again, too, so you can't call these "Nokia phones". They are Microsoft phones now.
  - mseebach 12y ago
    Nokia can't market mobile phones under the Nokia brand until 2016. Also, the company Nokia doesn't own a phone division anymore, they'll have to build one, if not from scratch, then pretty close to. That mean they don't have any competitive advantage over pretty much any other company in a similar situation. Never mind that they really, really struggled to compete in the smartphone market - that's why they offloaded the mobile phone division in the first place. In other words, I doubt very much that we will see consumer mobile phones from the not-Microsoft-owned bits of Nokia.
    - Nux 12y ago
      I'd like to see Nokia back in business (used their phones all my life), but it indeed looks quite unlikely.
    - ZeroGravitas 12y ago
      I wouldn't be surprised if they licensed the name out to some up and coming Chinese corporation with a difficult for English speakers to pronounce name.
- userbinator 12y ago
  Microsoft is probably used just for the added effect of juxtaposition with Android in the title.
- 12y ago
higherpurpose 12y ago
This has even fewer apps than WP8, let alone the "real" Android. I don't see why anyone would want this.
- morganvachon 12y ago
  I don't know why you're being modded down, you're exactly right. Just like the Ovi Store on Symbian, the Nokia Store offers a fraction of the apps that Play, Microsoft App Store, and even the Amazon App Store offer. As for why people would want this, it's actually good hardware for the price, and if it's ever rooted and flashed with a full Android ROM with Play support, it would end up being a nice phone overall.
  - dublinben 12y ago
    Skip all that work, and just get a Moto E. At least it's an Android device that actually comes with access to Google's app store and services out of the box.
  - dm2 12y ago
    Everything in this post that even hints at being anti-Microsoft has been heavily downvoted in this post. It looks like some MS employees have been asked to do some dirty social media manipulation.
- ewzimm 12y ago
  You are not limited to the included app store. Just like with FireOS, you can install shops like 1mobile and f-droid. http://www.1mobile.com/ http://www.1mobile.com/ https://f-droid.org/ https://f-droid.org/
dingdingdang 12y ago
Look at the pseudo-win-phone interface on that X2. It looks what it is: an imitation of another phone.. also it's blatantly confusing for users who will now see what appears to be a windows phone interface but be unable to use windows phone apps. Odd strategy.
- vezycash 12y ago
  This confusing is indeed real. Just last week, a friend told me that he wanted to get a windows phone. It turns out he thought the predecessor of this phone was a windows phone.
- LoneWolf 12y ago
  That pseudo-win-phone interface was my first thought too, a really bad idea IMHO, as you pointed out it will only confuse users. Something I also thought was that the idea is to create a better opinion of the windows phone, and to confuse users to buy windows phones in the future. I also wonder how nice this pseudo-win-phone will play with all the other android apps. (Disclaimer: I have used a WP7.8 phone and hated it, since then I developed a hate for the windows phone, I feel so limited when compared to android)
  - HenryMc 12y ago
    WP8.1 is so far ahead of 7.8. Don't write WP off just yet.
- jpalomaki 12y ago
  The strategy makes more sense when you consider this originated from Nokia. Nokia had three lines of products: feature phones, the mid range and then Lumia. The mid range was problematic. The phones could not compete with low end Android phones, because the operating system was getting outdated. On the other hand Nokia's Linux projects (Maemo/Meego and then Meltemi) had failed or were driven down to save money. Windows Phone had it's limitations on hardware support and probably Microsoft did not want to take it to low end devices. So they needed something and they ended up on Android. Skinning the phone to look like Windows Phone made it feel like part of the larger product family. In future it would have then been easier to get the users to migrate to low end Windows Phones. Maybe there was also a "political" twist. Nokia was negotiating with Microsoft about the sale of the mobile phones unit. Maybe it put more pressure on Microsoft when they saw that Nokia was moving towards Android.
vezycash 12y ago
I don't have an issue with Microsoft releasing an android phone. My issue is that this phone has 1gb ram and front facing camera for the price of Lumia 520. I'll need to fork out at least twice that amount to get the equivalent hardware spec in windows phone.
- skrebbel 12y ago
  20 times this. Sounds like they're already burying Windows Phone (which would really suck, since it's way better than Android IMO, especially since 8.1).
  - retejo 12y ago
    Hmm, just wondering. Why do you think windows phone is better than android? Android is easy to hack about with, custom roms, the source is open and out there (most of it anyway)and generally has great usibility.
    - morganvachon 12y ago
      For me, it's because Windows Phone is more task-oriented than app-oriented. There's a "flow" to the interface that just jives with my way of working on mobile. To be sure, Android is more powerful in many ways, but with my Windows phone I can do all the same things I did on Android: SSH into my servers, VNC to support clients, etc. I'm missing a few games and novelty apps, but I don't use my phone as a gaming platform or toy, I use it to get work done. And even on a fairly modern Android phone running JB, I've more than once had the same old issue I've always had on Android: If a call comes in when it's low on free RAM, there is simply no way to answer as the screen doesn't respond to taps. This has been the case on every Android phone I've used since 1.5 on a Motorola Cliq. Android is great when you need a mobile computer, but not so much when you need a mission critical device.
    - efdee 12y ago
      Most people who buy a phone don't really care about hackability, open source and custom roms. I own both a WP and a Nexus 5 and frankly, usability and consistency is better on the WP. I prefer Android for the reasons you stated, but you need to understand most people don't think about it that way.
DCKing 12y ago
Microsoft releases a phone running Android, Microsoft releases hardware running Linux, pigs are flying and hell is freezing over etc etc. The real news is that this is not just an Android phone, it's a really good Android phone. It has a front facing camera, a decent SoC, enough RAM, what appears to be an IPS display (according to some sources), likely very decent build quality, and a price that is likely to dip below €100 or even $100 soon enough. Android phones in that price range are generally extremely bad quality, but this seems to be a very decent package.
- morganvachon 12y ago
  Except it doesn't have the Google Play store or Play Services, so it's not going to appeal to the usual Android user. As someone who uses Windows Phone, I keep scratching my head wondering why Microsoft even bothers.
  - DCKing 12y ago
    I'm not suggesting it appeals to the Android user at all, it appeals to the prospective smartphone user. As long as you can install basic messaging apps on these things (which you can), this is a really good deal. This is a market segment which can also easily be filled by Windows Phone - it's probably even better for that. That I also find baffling. Windows Phone doesn't seem to be compatible with the particular SoC used in this device, but that is a problem Microsoft should be able to fix...
  - NicoJuicy 12y ago
    This could hurt manufacturers, who produce Android smartphones. If MS produces the phone in a low-budget segment and with decent quality. Manufacturers could consider WP with a higher profit margin, but that's my first guess. My second would be hurting Google by not providing their services as default, while increasing traffic to their own cloud services. My third guess would be increasing their global smartphone marketshare by entering the Android market and it's massive apps marketplace. And a fourth guess, if 200.000 app makers enter the Nokia store, they could easily email all of them to consider converting their app to the WP market... With some clever subsidizing in place (eg. 0% cut the first 6 months, instead of the default 30%), it could increase the WP Apps quantity in a very short period.
dm2 12y ago
"It will cost 99 euro ($135; £80) when released in July." Is that the price with a 2-year contract or is this going to be a great value phone? Will I be able to wipe this phone and install stock Android? Skype, Outlook, Bing, and all that other MS crap is unwanted. I'm actually a MS supporter and understand the need for them to create all of those services but I personally don't/won't use them. Also, why are UK citizens against adopting the euro?
- trentmb 12y ago
  Why doesn't the European Union and the UK just adopt the US dollar?
  - pjc50 12y ago
    Effectively this is what the Bretton Woods system was. It has the limitation that states then have to maintain a neutral balance of payments (imports+investment in = exports+investment out). This turns out to be much harder than it sounds, especially in a world of expensive post 1971 oil and even more so given post 2005 oil prices.
    - pjc50 12y ago
      Well, I didn't expect _that_ to get downvoted.
- richardwhiuk 12y ago
  Why are the US against adopting the Euro? I'm only partially joking there. The Euro has had large amounts of turmoil in the past three years which has involved large bailouts of some countries. The inevitable path appears to be closer alignment of fiscal policy (including taxation and public spending) which is sovereignty that the UK public is opposed to giving up. There's a strong anti-EU sentiment in the UK with a significant proportion in favour of the UK leaving the EU.
  - dm2 12y ago
    That makes sense. It was a real question I had, I have no opinion of the matter. I guess the UK sees itself as having a more stable economy that other European Union countries, so it would benefit from having a separate currency (but the other countries would be hurt by not having a very strong country adopt the euro).
kkhire 12y ago
Microsoft really needs to get back on that path of completely changing the game in the mobile realm. I don't know if this is the start, but its sure as hell better than releasing the same thing slightly updated over and over again (Don't mimic Apple with this strategy, it won't work for you MSFT)
retejo 12y ago
Did anyone notice the specs section in this article? "A front facing camera for taking selfies"
n0body 12y ago
it had already been developed, it would have made no sense for them to scrap it.
- jacquesm 12y ago
  It would because this sends a very confusing message into the market. If you want to please everybody you end up pleasing nobody.
- lyndonh 12y ago
  It was developed before or after Elop's burning platform speech ?
  - sirkneeland 12y ago
    Elop's burning platform speech (memo, really) was from February 2011. So the Nokia X came way, way after...
    - lyndonh 12y ago
      It was a rhetorical question. But it's not necessarily true that Nokia X came "way after". Nokia could have put the project on hold when they started serious negotiations with Microsoft.
mantraxC 12y ago
Oh, Jesus, this looks like the unfortunate result of a Windows Phone and an Android phone in a teleporter accident. Many here are cheering as if this is good somehow, because Microsoft is open and what not. But look at it. It looks like Windows Phone, but is an Android phone. It exists to confuse customers. What is the supposed end game here? "Hey, buy this and if you like it, we'll make you abandon all your Android apps, and switch to real Windows phone - because the home screen tiles look similar"? I don't think so. This project is more the result of a slow-moving corporate behemoth that started this project way before Microsoft announced it's buying Nokia. It was too late to turn that giant ship in time, I guess, so enjoy your mutant monster. By the way, the startup sound is Ripley whispering "Kill me" in your ear.
talles 12y ago
I sincerely don't get what is the point of releasing an android phone with Nokia Store rather than Google Play...
cbr 12y ago
What browser does this use? Is there now an IE for Android? EDIT: It's Opera Mini: http://gigaom.com/2014/06/24/microsofts-android-line-evolves-new-nokia-x2-handset-has-opera-as-default-browser/ http://gigaom.com/2014/06/24/microsofts-android-line-evolves...
- johansch 12y ago
  It's actually "Opera" based on Blink.
spinchange 12y ago
It seems like Microsoft and Amazon are not getting the real benefit of this platform by excluding the Google Play store from their versions of the Android experience. I guess it's understandable why they're doing that, it's just bad for users. Are there some kind of licensing terms that prevent them from shipping forks like this with the Google Play store as one of two app stores available? Would they have to make the all the Google apps 'first class' citizens just to allow users the ability to install any of them ala carte?
- snorkel 12y ago
  The real battleground is services. Amazon, Google, Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft want everyone to buy their phone because it delivers their services and their ecosystem. Doesn't matter what the operating system happens to be.
- nnnnni 12y ago
  My Kindle Fire HD was intolerable until I rooted it and installed the Google Play store!
- ewzimm 12y ago
  Yes, Google requires making their search and services default and allows only superficial Android modifications for anyone who wants to distribute Google Play Services. Reference: http://www.androidbeat.com/2014/02/android-open-google-certified-android-not/ http://www.androidbeat.com/2014/02/android-open-google-certi...
  - spinchange 12y ago
    Thanks for the link. I thought I vaguely remembered hearing something about this before. Just as with Microsoft and Amazon, I get why Google does this, but I think it hurts users and pretty much guarantees there's going to be limited Android experiences for lots of users out there. "Take all our apps, on our terms, or take none," pretty much guarantees the Microsofts and Amazons of the world are going to take none. Andorid may be an open platform but it's primary app distribution channel clearly is not. It's an interesting contortion...they don't qualitatively screen apps, but they effectively screen what flavor of the platform can have the chief app repository itself.
johansch 12y ago
http://gigaom.com/2014/06/24/microsofts-android-line-evolves-new-nokia-x2-handset-has-opera-as-default-browser/ http://gigaom.com/2014/06/24/microsofts-android-line-evolves... "Here’s a fun game. Mentally rewind 5 years and see how likely the following sentence would have been: Microsoft has decided to make Opera the default browser on its new, Linux-based Android handsets."
- Sanddancer 12y ago
  Well, five years ago, Microsoft-owned subsidiary Danger released the Sidekick LX 2009, which used NetBSD as its operating system, used a JVM derivative, and a browser not based on IE. Everything old is new again.
  - hga 12y ago
    But 5 years ago it was axiomatic that Microsoft would throw such a system away, and replace it with something underwhelming. In this case, the Kin, a total disaster. We're now seeing that Microsoft may be starting to rid itself of the platform tax that's crippled so many of their efforts. In the case of the Kin, that even included Exchange support, which wasn't a desiderata for its market (and to make things worse, the code/libraries the Kin team was supplied were extremely buggy).
    - random28345 12y ago
      > But 5 years ago it was axiomatic that Microsoft would throw such a system away, and replace it with something underwhelming. Is not not axiomatic that the Nokia Android phone is a temporary thing? They aren't trying to build a line of Android phones, they are trying to retain market share as a phone manufacturer until Windows Phone is more successful. Either Windows Phone becomes a solid 3rd place Smartphone OS, and they kill their Android line, or Windows Phone becomes an obvious failure, and they sell the remnants of Nokia. Either way, 6 years from now MS will no longer be selling Android phones.
      - hga 12y ago
brudgers 12y ago
To me, this looks like Microsoft opening a new front against Google and one which has the potential to change the landscape - note that I said 'potential', I'm not claiming unequivocally the strategy will be successful and Google will be sent to the dustbin of history. What I am claiming is that Microsoft: + May have the killer smartphone app - carrier independent voice calls (aka "Skype"). + Clearly has a more thoughtfully designed user interface in the form of Metro versus Android's WIMP on a phone mashups. + Could offer a more thoughtfully integrated suite of development tools should they get Android tooling into Visual Studio. + Already has a set of platform agnostic cloud services that are at least as good as Google's and since they include Office more attractive to general users. + Because of their B2B orientation, access to revenue streams other than advertising and therefore more latitude in providing a more appealing user experience in the consumer market. Finally it is possible that Microsoft will play the 'bundling' card against Google's policy in regard to its platform, and by producing an Android phone, they get legal standing.
- rbanffy 12y ago
  > + May have the killer smartphone app - carrier independent voice calls (aka "Skype"). So does every Android and iOS device, unless Microsoft wants to remove it from the android matket and the app store. > + Clearly has a more thoughtfully designed user interface in the form of Metro versus Android's WIMP on a phone mashups. That's debatable. I prefer Android to Windows Phone. Sometimes, even over the iPhone. And there are days I miss WebOS... > + Could offer a more thoughtfully integrated suite of development tools should they get Android tooling into Visual Studio. I kind of like the Android toolset. > + Already has a set of platform agnostic cloud services that are at least as good as Google's and since they include Office more attractive to general users. At least as good as Google means Google is still the standard. Attractive to Office users. > + Because of their B2B orientation, access to revenue streams other than advertising and therefore more latitude in providing a more appealing user experience in the consumer market. Only as long as they can indirectly monetize a lock-in from the handset.
  - brudgers 12y ago
    You've already told me many many times that you don't like Microsoft. And if I didn't know, I could just look at your user profile where it is stated explicitly. There's about zero content in your response. Just scattershot contradiction using the pick apart technique in hopes of trolling an inflamed response.
hippich 12y ago
"Embrace, extend and extinguish" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish
yourad_io 12y ago
> "The whole idea of bringing more people into Microsoft Cloud through these services is the very core of the strategy," Jussi Nevanlinna, vice-president of mobile phones product marketing at Microsoft, told the BBC. That blade cuts both ways: By providing full/native MS cloud support on Android, you are allowing people who would otherwise be "locked in" to WP, to escape into Android. Couldn't this potentially end up hurting their cloud services more than it helps?
- sirkneeland 12y ago
  If you assumed they were at all likely to buy WP. But most of them were not. The choice MS faces is not "sell them WP or sell them Android" but "sell them Android or someone else will"
bunderbunder 12y ago
What this says to me as a developer in the Microsoft ecosystem (admittedly, enterprise side and not mobile): "Four years ago we had you writing all your apps using Silverlight. Two years ago we chucked that out the window (ahahahaha) and told you to switch over to WinRT. Now we're going Android. We hope you've got the message by now. But in case you haven't, let us restate it in plain English: Dear developers, GO THE @$#!% AWAY."
- pling 12y ago
  It doesn't say that to me. It says: "Nokia baggage". That is all. Either way, I'm not writing another damn mobile app or picking up another damn smartphone again. It's all totally crazy bananas now. I'd rather write win32 again with a broken-ass compiler.
  - chucknelson 12y ago
    Make your fantasy a (simulated) reality. With current trends you'd probably be best served by creating "win32js".
    - yellowapple 12y ago
      "It's like WINE, but it runs in your browser and at a whole 1/10 native speed!"
    - pling 12y ago
      That's actually pretty funny! I'm with Bob Pease at the moment: "My favourite programming language is solder".
    - Aldo_MX 12y ago
      Yes please!!! I want to play old Windows Games in my browser in my Windows PC... Oh wait...
- zanny 12y ago
  I think the real message is: "Hey, we're a company. We have things. That doesn't mean users use our things, or that developing for said things is going make you money or a userbase. That requires looking at the market and seeing where users are." They create the supply side. If there is no demand, blindly working in their tools is just a silly mistake. I think it has been plainly demonstrated nothing Windows Phone offers entices the mobile market away from Android en masse at this point.
mkr-hn 12y ago
It's the cheap Android phone everyone expected Amazon to make. I didn't know Nokia had an Android store. Is it better or worse than Amazon's?
shmerl 12y ago
MS shouldn't forget to... threaten themselves with their own bogus patents ;)
SchizoDuckie 12y ago
For $115 you can have a Dogee Valencia DG800, which runs circles around this crippled MSNokiAndroid phone: http://www.doogeemobile.com/doogee-dg800-smartphone-android-4-4-mtk6582-4-5-inch-1gb-8gb-13mp-camera.html http://www.doogeemobile.com/doogee-dg800-smartphone-android-... I'm still wondering where Microsoft is going with this. I really don't see this working very well without the benefit of the Play Store
BigChiefSmokem 12y ago
I'm a C# developer (and strong supporter of .NET and Xamarin) and this signals to me that I have that many more options now - its great and very exciting for me to hear all this great news coming out of Microsoft almost every other week. DevDiv's tools and frameworks is where it's at when it comes to building big multi-platform codebases - backend, front-end, desktop, mobile, cloud, whatever. Add to that the immense infrastructure and operations support I get from the MS business ecosystem and it's just icing on my Productivity Cake. I don't mind paying them because I get great stuff for the price. I never understood how tech-intelligent people would hold so much hate towards a company that pretty much provides some of the broadest selection of tools and solutions geekdom has ever known. Side Anecdote: A little bird recently told me that while working at Box, the attitude from management was so hateful against Microsoft that they were willing to blow through huge amounts of money just to roll their own HR system. What?! As an investor I want my investments to make me more money any way possible - and NOT be wasted trying to recreate wheels just to satisfy some sort of nonsensical personal grudge. This opinion people have with the brand loyalties (and grudges) they hold are non-sense through and through and bad for business.
- mncolinlee 12y ago
  Here's a good start to explaining the animosity. Microsoft spent billions to make sure companies didn't adopt open source software. It wasn't just the SCO money. There was also an associated PR and marketing FUD (Fear-Uncertainty-Doubt) campaign claiming that open source software would destroy your company through lawsuits. Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer referred to Linux in 2001 as "a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it touches". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_controversies#Microsoft_funding_of_SCO_controversy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_controversies... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Microsoft http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Micr...

168 points by madradavid 12y ago

Embrace, extend, ... But seriously: I'm very curious to see where this goes. Perhaps a way of running Android apps on Win phones? That would be a tremendous boost.

DigitalSea 12y ago

Hell has officially frozen over. Seriously though. This is great news, good to see that Microsoft is opening themselves up. Whether or not this is because of the new leadership, it's definitely the step in the right direction for Microsoft.

BuckRogers 12y ago
Just business tactic, not 'opening up'.

tyrionaura 12y ago

Earlier Nokia X handsets did actually run Android too, so this move isn't that much unexpected.

lucaspiller 12y ago
I'm not sure how this differs from them as it has exactly the same interface. Unless it comes with Google Play? I've got a dual SIM version of the Nokia X and it's about as bad as you imagine it to be. Side loading Google Play helped, but it's still not great. The Moto G is a much better investment.

lcnmrn 12y ago

They could get Android apps working on Windows Phone OS, rather than this. Microsoft is useless these days.

morganvachon 12y ago
I doubt that will ever happen, and I hope it doesn't. I'd much prefer to see proper ports of Android and iOS apps, rather than some Frankenstein style compatibility layer.
seabrookmx 12y ago
Blackberry tried this. Even on QNX, which is a POSIX OS, it took significant amounts of work and last I checked was still pretty buggy. Sailfish has had much better luck, no doubt due to running on top of the Linux kernel however.

_pmf_ 12y ago

Nokia. The fact that Nokia belongs to Microsoft is immaterial here. It's a Nokia phone.

higherpurpose 12y ago
Nokia doesn't belong to Microsoft. Nokia's phone division belongs to Microsoft. I imagine the actual Nokia company will begin selling Android phones in a couple of years again, too, so you can't call these "Nokia phones". They are Microsoft phones now.
- mseebach 12y ago
  Nokia can't market mobile phones under the Nokia brand until 2016. Also, the company Nokia doesn't own a phone division anymore, they'll have to build one, if not from scratch, then pretty close to. That mean they don't have any competitive advantage over pretty much any other company in a similar situation. Never mind that they really, really struggled to compete in the smartphone market - that's why they offloaded the mobile phone division in the first place. In other words, I doubt very much that we will see consumer mobile phones from the not-Microsoft-owned bits of Nokia.
  - Nux 12y ago
    I'd like to see Nokia back in business (used their phones all my life), but it indeed looks quite unlikely.
  - ZeroGravitas 12y ago
    I wouldn't be surprised if they licensed the name out to some up and coming Chinese corporation with a difficult for English speakers to pronounce name.
userbinator 12y ago
Microsoft is probably used just for the added effect of juxtaposition with Android in the title.
12y ago

higherpurpose 12y ago

This has even fewer apps than WP8, let alone the "real" Android. I don't see why anyone would want this.

morganvachon 12y ago
I don't know why you're being modded down, you're exactly right. Just like the Ovi Store on Symbian, the Nokia Store offers a fraction of the apps that Play, Microsoft App Store, and even the Amazon App Store offer. As for why people would want this, it's actually good hardware for the price, and if it's ever rooted and flashed with a full Android ROM with Play support, it would end up being a nice phone overall.
- dublinben 12y ago
  Skip all that work, and just get a Moto E. At least it's an Android device that actually comes with access to Google's app store and services out of the box.
- dm2 12y ago
  Everything in this post that even hints at being anti-Microsoft has been heavily downvoted in this post. It looks like some MS employees have been asked to do some dirty social media manipulation.
ewzimm 12y ago
You are not limited to the included app store. Just like with FireOS, you can install shops like 1mobile and f-droid. http://www.1mobile.com/ http://www.1mobile.com/ https://f-droid.org/ https://f-droid.org/

dingdingdang 12y ago

Look at the pseudo-win-phone interface on that X2. It looks what it is: an imitation of another phone.. also it's blatantly confusing for users who will now see what appears to be a windows phone interface but be unable to use windows phone apps. Odd strategy.

vezycash 12y ago
This confusing is indeed real. Just last week, a friend told me that he wanted to get a windows phone. It turns out he thought the predecessor of this phone was a windows phone.
LoneWolf 12y ago
That pseudo-win-phone interface was my first thought too, a really bad idea IMHO, as you pointed out it will only confuse users. Something I also thought was that the idea is to create a better opinion of the windows phone, and to confuse users to buy windows phones in the future. I also wonder how nice this pseudo-win-phone will play with all the other android apps. (Disclaimer: I have used a WP7.8 phone and hated it, since then I developed a hate for the windows phone, I feel so limited when compared to android)
- HenryMc 12y ago
  WP8.1 is so far ahead of 7.8. Don't write WP off just yet.
jpalomaki 12y ago
The strategy makes more sense when you consider this originated from Nokia. Nokia had three lines of products: feature phones, the mid range and then Lumia. The mid range was problematic. The phones could not compete with low end Android phones, because the operating system was getting outdated. On the other hand Nokia's Linux projects (Maemo/Meego and then Meltemi) had failed or were driven down to save money. Windows Phone had it's limitations on hardware support and probably Microsoft did not want to take it to low end devices. So they needed something and they ended up on Android. Skinning the phone to look like Windows Phone made it feel like part of the larger product family. In future it would have then been easier to get the users to migrate to low end Windows Phones. Maybe there was also a "political" twist. Nokia was negotiating with Microsoft about the sale of the mobile phones unit. Maybe it put more pressure on Microsoft when they saw that Nokia was moving towards Android.

vezycash 12y ago

I don't have an issue with Microsoft releasing an android phone. My issue is that this phone has 1gb ram and front facing camera for the price of Lumia 520. I'll need to fork out at least twice that amount to get the equivalent hardware spec in windows phone.

skrebbel 12y ago
20 times this. Sounds like they're already burying Windows Phone (which would really suck, since it's way better than Android IMO, especially since 8.1).
- retejo 12y ago
  Hmm, just wondering. Why do you think windows phone is better than android? Android is easy to hack about with, custom roms, the source is open and out there (most of it anyway)and generally has great usibility.
  - morganvachon 12y ago
    For me, it's because Windows Phone is more task-oriented than app-oriented. There's a "flow" to the interface that just jives with my way of working on mobile. To be sure, Android is more powerful in many ways, but with my Windows phone I can do all the same things I did on Android: SSH into my servers, VNC to support clients, etc. I'm missing a few games and novelty apps, but I don't use my phone as a gaming platform or toy, I use it to get work done. And even on a fairly modern Android phone running JB, I've more than once had the same old issue I've always had on Android: If a call comes in when it's low on free RAM, there is simply no way to answer as the screen doesn't respond to taps. This has been the case on every Android phone I've used since 1.5 on a Motorola Cliq. Android is great when you need a mobile computer, but not so much when you need a mission critical device.
  - efdee 12y ago
    Most people who buy a phone don't really care about hackability, open source and custom roms. I own both a WP and a Nexus 5 and frankly, usability and consistency is better on the WP. I prefer Android for the reasons you stated, but you need to understand most people don't think about it that way.

DCKing 12y ago

Microsoft releases a phone running Android, Microsoft releases hardware running Linux, pigs are flying and hell is freezing over etc etc. The real news is that this is not just an Android phone, it's a really good Android phone. It has a front facing camera, a decent SoC, enough RAM, what appears to be an IPS display (according to some sources), likely very decent build quality, and a price that is likely to dip below €100 or even $100 soon enough. Android phones in that price range are generally extremely bad quality, but this seems to be a very decent package.

morganvachon 12y ago
Except it doesn't have the Google Play store or Play Services, so it's not going to appeal to the usual Android user. As someone who uses Windows Phone, I keep scratching my head wondering why Microsoft even bothers.
- DCKing 12y ago
  I'm not suggesting it appeals to the Android user at all, it appeals to the prospective smartphone user. As long as you can install basic messaging apps on these things (which you can), this is a really good deal. This is a market segment which can also easily be filled by Windows Phone - it's probably even better for that. That I also find baffling. Windows Phone doesn't seem to be compatible with the particular SoC used in this device, but that is a problem Microsoft should be able to fix...
- NicoJuicy 12y ago
  This could hurt manufacturers, who produce Android smartphones. If MS produces the phone in a low-budget segment and with decent quality. Manufacturers could consider WP with a higher profit margin, but that's my first guess. My second would be hurting Google by not providing their services as default, while increasing traffic to their own cloud services. My third guess would be increasing their global smartphone marketshare by entering the Android market and it's massive apps marketplace. And a fourth guess, if 200.000 app makers enter the Nokia store, they could easily email all of them to consider converting their app to the WP market... With some clever subsidizing in place (eg. 0% cut the first 6 months, instead of the default 30%), it could increase the WP Apps quantity in a very short period.

dm2 12y ago

"It will cost 99 euro ($135; £80) when released in July." Is that the price with a 2-year contract or is this going to be a great value phone? Will I be able to wipe this phone and install stock Android? Skype, Outlook, Bing, and all that other MS crap is unwanted. I'm actually a MS supporter and understand the need for them to create all of those services but I personally don't/won't use them. Also, why are UK citizens against adopting the euro?

trentmb 12y ago
Why doesn't the European Union and the UK just adopt the US dollar?
- pjc50 12y ago
  Effectively this is what the Bretton Woods system was. It has the limitation that states then have to maintain a neutral balance of payments (imports+investment in = exports+investment out). This turns out to be much harder than it sounds, especially in a world of expensive post 1971 oil and even more so given post 2005 oil prices.
  - pjc50 12y ago
    Well, I didn't expect _that_ to get downvoted.
richardwhiuk 12y ago
Why are the US against adopting the Euro? I'm only partially joking there. The Euro has had large amounts of turmoil in the past three years which has involved large bailouts of some countries. The inevitable path appears to be closer alignment of fiscal policy (including taxation and public spending) which is sovereignty that the UK public is opposed to giving up. There's a strong anti-EU sentiment in the UK with a significant proportion in favour of the UK leaving the EU.
- dm2 12y ago
  That makes sense. It was a real question I had, I have no opinion of the matter. I guess the UK sees itself as having a more stable economy that other European Union countries, so it would benefit from having a separate currency (but the other countries would be hurt by not having a very strong country adopt the euro).

kkhire 12y ago

Microsoft really needs to get back on that path of completely changing the game in the mobile realm. I don't know if this is the start, but its sure as hell better than releasing the same thing slightly updated over and over again (Don't mimic Apple with this strategy, it won't work for you MSFT)

retejo 12y ago

Did anyone notice the specs section in this article? "A front facing camera for taking selfies"

n0body 12y ago

it had already been developed, it would have made no sense for them to scrap it.

jacquesm 12y ago
It would because this sends a very confusing message into the market. If you want to please everybody you end up pleasing nobody.
lyndonh 12y ago
It was developed before or after Elop's burning platform speech ?
- sirkneeland 12y ago
  Elop's burning platform speech (memo, really) was from February 2011. So the Nokia X came way, way after...
  - lyndonh 12y ago
    It was a rhetorical question. But it's not necessarily true that Nokia X came "way after". Nokia could have put the project on hold when they started serious negotiations with Microsoft.

mantraxC 12y ago

Oh, Jesus, this looks like the unfortunate result of a Windows Phone and an Android phone in a teleporter accident. Many here are cheering as if this is good somehow, because Microsoft is open and what not. But look at it. It looks like Windows Phone, but is an Android phone. It exists to confuse customers. What is the supposed end game here? "Hey, buy this and if you like it, we'll make you abandon all your Android apps, and switch to real Windows phone - because the home screen tiles look similar"? I don't think so. This project is more the result of a slow-moving corporate behemoth that started this project way before Microsoft announced it's buying Nokia. It was too late to turn that giant ship in time, I guess, so enjoy your mutant monster. By the way, the startup sound is Ripley whispering "Kill me" in your ear.

talles 12y ago

I sincerely don't get what is the point of releasing an android phone with Nokia Store rather than Google Play...

cbr 12y ago

What browser does this use? Is there now an IE for Android? EDIT: It's Opera Mini: http://gigaom.com/2014/06/24/microsofts-android-line-evolves-new-nokia-x2-handset-has-opera-as-default-browser/ http://gigaom.com/2014/06/24/microsofts-android-line-evolves...

johansch 12y ago
It's actually "Opera" based on Blink.

spinchange 12y ago

It seems like Microsoft and Amazon are not getting the real benefit of this platform by excluding the Google Play store from their versions of the Android experience. I guess it's understandable why they're doing that, it's just bad for users. Are there some kind of licensing terms that prevent them from shipping forks like this with the Google Play store as one of two app stores available? Would they have to make the all the Google apps 'first class' citizens just to allow users the ability to install any of them ala carte?

snorkel 12y ago
The real battleground is services. Amazon, Google, Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft want everyone to buy their phone because it delivers their services and their ecosystem. Doesn't matter what the operating system happens to be.
nnnnni 12y ago
My Kindle Fire HD was intolerable until I rooted it and installed the Google Play store!
ewzimm 12y ago
Yes, Google requires making their search and services default and allows only superficial Android modifications for anyone who wants to distribute Google Play Services. Reference: http://www.androidbeat.com/2014/02/android-open-google-certified-android-not/ http://www.androidbeat.com/2014/02/android-open-google-certi...
- spinchange 12y ago
  Thanks for the link. I thought I vaguely remembered hearing something about this before. Just as with Microsoft and Amazon, I get why Google does this, but I think it hurts users and pretty much guarantees there's going to be limited Android experiences for lots of users out there. "Take all our apps, on our terms, or take none," pretty much guarantees the Microsofts and Amazons of the world are going to take none. Andorid may be an open platform but it's primary app distribution channel clearly is not. It's an interesting contortion...they don't qualitatively screen apps, but they effectively screen what flavor of the platform can have the chief app repository itself.

johansch 12y ago

http://gigaom.com/2014/06/24/microsofts-android-line-evolves-new-nokia-x2-handset-has-opera-as-default-browser/ http://gigaom.com/2014/06/24/microsofts-android-line-evolves... "Here’s a fun game. Mentally rewind 5 years and see how likely the following sentence would have been: Microsoft has decided to make Opera the default browser on its new, Linux-based Android handsets."

Sanddancer 12y ago
Well, five years ago, Microsoft-owned subsidiary Danger released the Sidekick LX 2009, which used NetBSD as its operating system, used a JVM derivative, and a browser not based on IE. Everything old is new again.
- hga 12y ago
  But 5 years ago it was axiomatic that Microsoft would throw such a system away, and replace it with something underwhelming. In this case, the Kin, a total disaster. We're now seeing that Microsoft may be starting to rid itself of the platform tax that's crippled so many of their efforts. In the case of the Kin, that even included Exchange support, which wasn't a desiderata for its market (and to make things worse, the code/libraries the Kin team was supplied were extremely buggy).
  - random28345 12y ago
    > But 5 years ago it was axiomatic that Microsoft would throw such a system away, and replace it with something underwhelming. Is not not axiomatic that the Nokia Android phone is a temporary thing? They aren't trying to build a line of Android phones, they are trying to retain market share as a phone manufacturer until Windows Phone is more successful. Either Windows Phone becomes a solid 3rd place Smartphone OS, and they kill their Android line, or Windows Phone becomes an obvious failure, and they sell the remnants of Nokia. Either way, 6 years from now MS will no longer be selling Android phones.
    - hga 12y ago

brudgers 12y ago

To me, this looks like Microsoft opening a new front against Google and one which has the potential to change the landscape - note that I said 'potential', I'm not claiming unequivocally the strategy will be successful and Google will be sent to the dustbin of history. What I am claiming is that Microsoft: + May have the killer smartphone app - carrier independent voice calls (aka "Skype"). + Clearly has a more thoughtfully designed user interface in the form of Metro versus Android's WIMP on a phone mashups. + Could offer a more thoughtfully integrated suite of development tools should they get Android tooling into Visual Studio. + Already has a set of platform agnostic cloud services that are at least as good as Google's and since they include Office more attractive to general users. + Because of their B2B orientation, access to revenue streams other than advertising and therefore more latitude in providing a more appealing user experience in the consumer market. Finally it is possible that Microsoft will play the 'bundling' card against Google's policy in regard to its platform, and by producing an Android phone, they get legal standing.

rbanffy 12y ago
> + May have the killer smartphone app - carrier independent voice calls (aka "Skype"). So does every Android and iOS device, unless Microsoft wants to remove it from the android matket and the app store. > + Clearly has a more thoughtfully designed user interface in the form of Metro versus Android's WIMP on a phone mashups. That's debatable. I prefer Android to Windows Phone. Sometimes, even over the iPhone. And there are days I miss WebOS... > + Could offer a more thoughtfully integrated suite of development tools should they get Android tooling into Visual Studio. I kind of like the Android toolset. > + Already has a set of platform agnostic cloud services that are at least as good as Google's and since they include Office more attractive to general users. At least as good as Google means Google is still the standard. Attractive to Office users. > + Because of their B2B orientation, access to revenue streams other than advertising and therefore more latitude in providing a more appealing user experience in the consumer market. Only as long as they can indirectly monetize a lock-in from the handset.
- brudgers 12y ago
  You've already told me many many times that you don't like Microsoft. And if I didn't know, I could just look at your user profile where it is stated explicitly. There's about zero content in your response. Just scattershot contradiction using the pick apart technique in hopes of trolling an inflamed response.

hippich 12y ago

"Embrace, extend and extinguish" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish

yourad_io 12y ago

> "The whole idea of bringing more people into Microsoft Cloud through these services is the very core of the strategy," Jussi Nevanlinna, vice-president of mobile phones product marketing at Microsoft, told the BBC. That blade cuts both ways: By providing full/native MS cloud support on Android, you are allowing people who would otherwise be "locked in" to WP, to escape into Android. Couldn't this potentially end up hurting their cloud services more than it helps?

sirkneeland 12y ago
If you assumed they were at all likely to buy WP. But most of them were not. The choice MS faces is not "sell them WP or sell them Android" but "sell them Android or someone else will"

bunderbunder 12y ago

What this says to me as a developer in the Microsoft ecosystem (admittedly, enterprise side and not mobile): "Four years ago we had you writing all your apps using Silverlight. Two years ago we chucked that out the window (ahahahaha) and told you to switch over to WinRT. Now we're going Android. We hope you've got the message by now. But in case you haven't, let us restate it in plain English: Dear developers, GO THE @$#!% AWAY."

pling 12y ago
It doesn't say that to me. It says: "Nokia baggage". That is all. Either way, I'm not writing another damn mobile app or picking up another damn smartphone again. It's all totally crazy bananas now. I'd rather write win32 again with a broken-ass compiler.
- chucknelson 12y ago
  Make your fantasy a (simulated) reality. With current trends you'd probably be best served by creating "win32js".
  - yellowapple 12y ago
    "It's like WINE, but it runs in your browser and at a whole 1/10 native speed!"
  - pling 12y ago
    That's actually pretty funny! I'm with Bob Pease at the moment: "My favourite programming language is solder".
  - Aldo_MX 12y ago
    Yes please!!! I want to play old Windows Games in my browser in my Windows PC... Oh wait...
zanny 12y ago
I think the real message is: "Hey, we're a company. We have things. That doesn't mean users use our things, or that developing for said things is going make you money or a userbase. That requires looking at the market and seeing where users are." They create the supply side. If there is no demand, blindly working in their tools is just a silly mistake. I think it has been plainly demonstrated nothing Windows Phone offers entices the mobile market away from Android en masse at this point.

mkr-hn 12y ago

It's the cheap Android phone everyone expected Amazon to make. I didn't know Nokia had an Android store. Is it better or worse than Amazon's?

shmerl 12y ago

MS shouldn't forget to... threaten themselves with their own bogus patents ;)

SchizoDuckie 12y ago

For $115 you can have a Dogee Valencia DG800, which runs circles around this crippled MSNokiAndroid phone: http://www.doogeemobile.com/doogee-dg800-smartphone-android-4-4-mtk6582-4-5-inch-1gb-8gb-13mp-camera.html http://www.doogeemobile.com/doogee-dg800-smartphone-android-... I'm still wondering where Microsoft is going with this. I really don't see this working very well without the benefit of the Play Store

BigChiefSmokem 12y ago

I'm a C# developer (and strong supporter of .NET and Xamarin) and this signals to me that I have that many more options now - its great and very exciting for me to hear all this great news coming out of Microsoft almost every other week. DevDiv's tools and frameworks is where it's at when it comes to building big multi-platform codebases - backend, front-end, desktop, mobile, cloud, whatever. Add to that the immense infrastructure and operations support I get from the MS business ecosystem and it's just icing on my Productivity Cake. I don't mind paying them because I get great stuff for the price. I never understood how tech-intelligent people would hold so much hate towards a company that pretty much provides some of the broadest selection of tools and solutions geekdom has ever known. Side Anecdote: A little bird recently told me that while working at Box, the attitude from management was so hateful against Microsoft that they were willing to blow through huge amounts of money just to roll their own HR system. What?! As an investor I want my investments to make me more money any way possible - and NOT be wasted trying to recreate wheels just to satisfy some sort of nonsensical personal grudge. This opinion people have with the brand loyalties (and grudges) they hold are non-sense through and through and bad for business.

mncolinlee 12y ago
Here's a good start to explaining the animosity. Microsoft spent billions to make sure companies didn't adopt open source software. It wasn't just the SCO money. There was also an associated PR and marketing FUD (Fear-Uncertainty-Doubt) campaign claiming that open source software would destroy your company through lawsuits. Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer referred to Linux in 2001 as "a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it touches". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_controversies#Microsoft_funding_of_SCO_controversy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_controversies... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Microsoft http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#Micr...