Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 29th Jul 2013 21:19 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless Nokia's vice president Bryan Biniak: "We are trying to evolve the cultural thinking [at Microsoft] to say 'time is of the essence'. Waiting until the end of your fiscal year when you need to close your targets, doesn't do us any good when I have phones to sell today." Later Biniak adds: "As a company we don't want to rely on somebody else and sit and wait for them to get it right." There was a simple solution to this problem.
Order by: Score:
Comment by Luminair
by Luminair on Mon 29th Jul 2013 21:26 UTC
Luminair
Member since:
2007-03-30

The glacial Windows Phone release schedule had me wondering if I was losing my mind. Could it really be that bad? But yes, it really is that bad. Thank this Nokia VP for the reality check

Reply Score: 7

RE: Comment by Luminair
by reduz on Mon 29th Jul 2013 22:47 UTC in reply to "Comment by Luminair"
reduz Member since:
2006-02-25

pretty much that. Windows phone is ages behind Android and iOS in feaures and usability, despite it being stylish and pretty. I had mine for a while and lack of updates is really dissapointing.

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: Comment by Luminair
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 30th Jul 2013 05:19 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Luminair"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Watch out--if you say that three times in front of a mirror, Nelson will come out and tell you that Nokia is doing just fine, and pull some pointless numbers from... well, somewhere, to prove it! And claim that Elop is not running the company into the ground, and that they're somehow thriving. Or something.

Reply Score: 13

RE[3]: Comment by Luminair
by Nelson on Tue 30th Jul 2013 11:00 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Luminair"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

This has zero to do with Nokias financials and more to do with Microsoft's corporate culture.

God forbid I actually know how to read a financial report. I've been consistently on target with how I think Nokia will do, whereas you, well you don't take a concrete position so its hard to tell.

Anyway, Microsoft needs to pick up the pace.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by Luminair
by lemur2 on Tue 30th Jul 2013 11:34 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Luminair"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Microsoft needs to pick up the pace.


It won't make any difference. People don't want Microsoft product, and in mobile and tablets they can buy market-leading gear that doesn't have it.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by Luminair
by Nelson on Tue 30th Jul 2013 11:57 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Luminair"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

http://infogr.am/Nokia-Lumia-sales

Clearly nobody wants Microsoft products. Nokia has increased volumes sequentially for every quarter except one of the Lumia's availability.

What reality do you live in?

Reply Score: 4

RE[6]: Comment by Luminair
by silviucc on Tue 30th Jul 2013 12:44 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Luminair"
silviucc Member since:
2009-12-05

US market does not seem to give two shits about those Lumias (according to your graph). They never cared about Nokia devices in general and they don't seem to be buying them now either.

I still can't understand the reason to have 3 almost incompatible platforms. Windows for x86 then Windows RT and Windows Phone for ARM.

If MS wants to be a devices and services company as they say then they should man up, show some balls and come up with a phone as they would do them, according to their "vision". Problem is they did some stuff in the past. Remember the Kin(s)? They sucked and got axed.

I'm quite baffled to see them going against a platform like android which does not have to earn Google any money on its own and think they have a chance of actually winning. They still don't seem to understand that this is not the old PC market where they have OEMs, partners and basically everybody else by the balls.

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by Luminair
by Nelson on Tue 30th Jul 2013 14:16 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Luminair"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Yeah, but that's not the point I responded to and you're not the person I replied to.

I replied to the specific claim that nobody wants Microsoft products, that much is provably false. Check the chart.

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by Luminair
by bentoo on Tue 30th Jul 2013 16:25 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Luminair"
bentoo Member since:
2012-09-21

I still can't understand the reason to have 3 almost incompatible platforms. Windows for x86 then Windows RT and Windows Phone for ARM.


Nothing like the super compatible Google platforms like ChromeOS then Android for ARM then Android for x86 or compatible Apple platform OS X for x86 then iOS for ARM. ;)

Edited 2013-07-30 16:26 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by Luminair
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 30th Jul 2013 14:04 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Luminair"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Anyway, Microsoft needs to pick up the pace.

And if they don't? Would you admit that Nokia (specifically, Elop) fucked themselves over hardcore? All I see according to the article is Microsoft screwing up and dragging their feet around with Windows Phone... and that is nothing new. It's also nothing new that Nokia is hurting over this. I don't need to read financial reports to tell me that:

1. Microsoft has been screwing up their phone platform forever now, and
2. Elop has made Nokia a Microsoft-only shop, despite the above fact.

I'm sure Microsoft loves their former employee for the loyalty he expressed by locking an entire phone hardware company into their operating system, but you'd think that after all this time they'd have already repaid him by supplying his company with a workable product that people (hardware manufacturers, phone customers) expect. But no--and now even Nokia's admitting that they're feeling the heat from the fact that Elop got them stuck between a rock and a hard place by making them dependent on Microsoft, and their well-being is effectively in the hands of Elop's partner.

Nokia screwed up. Now it's up to Microsoft to determine their fate, or for Nokia to consider a plan B. Nokia doesn't appear to be going anywhere fast.

Reply Score: 7

RE[5]: Comment by Luminair
by Nelson on Tue 30th Jul 2013 14:12 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Luminair"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

If they don't, then yes I will. Nokia for their part is doing all they can. That much is obvious.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by Luminair
by cdude on Tue 30th Jul 2013 16:23 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Luminair"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Anyway, Microsoft needs to pick up the pace.
And if they don't?

No what if, they don't what lead to the strong public critic raised by Nokia now. Read the interview. According to Nokia Microsoft was all in for the first half of 2012 and stopped since then. Why? Connect the dots.

Would you admit that Nokia (specifically, Elop) f--ked themselves over hardcore?

Its not that big secret that reasons human and financial resources are removed is that, for Microsoft, the WP strategy did not work out. It failed and behind the scene work towards an alternate strategy goes on. That's where resources where shifted to.

I suspect Microsoft aborting negotiations with Nokia has the same reason. Microsoft is working on an alternate strategy since more then a year now. Maybe a Windows Phone 9 bundled with a Surface Phone. I think we will see soon and Nokia may well aware of it what is why they raise public voices now.

This isn't any longer a warning, its a loud Nokia-investors alarm-bell ringing here. Microsoft may show off there new strategy soon and Nokia will be sidelined.

Edited 2013-07-30 16:30 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Comment by Luminair
by TemporalBeing on Tue 30th Jul 2013 17:34 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Luminair"
TemporalBeing Member since:
2007-08-22

This isn't any longer a warning, its a loud Nokia-investors alarm-bell ringing here. Microsoft may show off there new strategy soon and Nokia will be sidelined.


Which is why you NEVER partner with Microsoft.

Reply Score: 6

RE[6]: Comment by Luminair
by Nelson on Tue 30th Jul 2013 18:39 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Luminair"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

So you're predicting a Surface phone? Just so I can add it to the list of things you've been wrong about.

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by Luminair
by cdude on Thu 1st Aug 2013 18:58 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Luminair"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

So you're predicting a Surface phone?

No, that's why I added a "Maybe" in front of that sentence. Sorry, I realize now that wasn't idiot-prove enough. I will color it yellow next time, okay?

What I predict is that somewhere between 2012/Q3 and 2014/Q2 Microsoft announces what can be understood as strategy-shift. Some new products that effectively sideline WP8 and with it Nokia. I mean much much more then they got sidelined ever since 2012/Q3. More in that Microsoft stops investment into WP8 in favor of an alternate (yellow-begin) like for example WP9 with Android emulator and a new strategic partnership with Samsung to bring it to the masses (yellow-end).

Microsoft is well aware that the Nokia-partnership failed. WP had a higher market share before the partnership. Goal is to increase massive and not decrease it. Even Bill Gates himself sayed it didn't worked out. So, question is not if but when and what. Its only clear that Nokia as of today isn't of much interest for Microsoft. Let them continue with WP8 and focus yourself on (yellow-start) WP9, Surface Phone, ... (yellow-end).

Reply Score: 1

Oh PUH-lease
by fretinator on Mon 29th Jul 2013 21:54 UTC
fretinator
Member since:
2005-07-06

You make a deal with Microsoft, and then are surprised when they don't dance to your tune. If someone would give me the address, I'll send some cheese to go with that whine.

Reply Score: 16

Comment by Stephen!
by Stephen! on Mon 29th Jul 2013 21:59 UTC
Stephen!
Member since:
2007-11-24

"As a company we don't want to rely on somebody else and sit and wait for them to get it right."


Then again, when it comes to mobile versions of Windows, Microsoft seems to have been trying "to get right" ever since Windows CE in 1996.

Reply Score: 15

i'll pile on....
by bnolsen on Mon 29th Jul 2013 22:33 UTC
bnolsen
Member since:
2006-01-06

let go almost all your own development staff and then complain that the company you depend on and have zero control over isn't working hard enough for you?

How long before nokia is allowed to follow LG, HTC, sony, etc and start producing their own android phones as well?

Edited 2013-07-29 22:35 UTC

Reply Score: 19

Stop whining!
by jello on Mon 29th Jul 2013 22:49 UTC
jello
Member since:
2006-08-08

What did you expect?

First you guys buy Symbian.
You control the OS and product timeline.

Then you buy Qt.
You control the OS and product timeline.

Next you kill Symbian, sell Qt and go with Windows-Phone-OS.
You loose control of the OS and product timeline.

Decisions, decisions...

Reply Score: 10

RE: Stop whining!
by kurkosdr on Mon 29th Jul 2013 23:32 UTC in reply to "Stop whining!"
kurkosdr Member since:
2011-04-11

Next you kill Symbian, sell Qt and go with Windows-Phone-OS.
You loose control of the OS and product timeline.

From a different point of view, Nokia doesn't "get" software (and operating systems in particular), so, it made sense to stop trying to make "their own" OS. After they purchased Symbian ltd, they tried with Symbian for a long period of time, no success. They tried with Linux and waited forever for their MeeGo OS to mature when at the same time the world was filling up with Androids, no dice.

Nokia decided it was in their best interest to stop making OSes, because they just couldn't, and use someone else's OS. If they hadn't picked the wrong OS (Windows Phone) but went with Android, they might not be where they are today.

The best years for Nokia's smartphone line were when Symbian S60 phones where being bought as feature phones by the general public (pre-iPhone days, of course), and that says a lot.

Here are some interesting reads for you, fellow Symbian user:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/23/symbian_history_part_one_da...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/29/symbian_history_part_two_ui...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/01/12/symbian_history_part_three_...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/10/nokia_ui_saga/

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/11/nokia_meego_inside_story/

Edited 2013-07-29 23:34 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Stop whining!
by WorknMan on Mon 29th Jul 2013 23:57 UTC in reply to "RE: Stop whining!"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Nokia decided it was in their best interest to stop making OSes, because they just couldn't, and use someone else's OS. If they hadn't picked the wrong OS (Windows Phone) but went with Android, they might not be where they are today.


If you wanna build an Android phone and have it released through carriers, you (unfortunately) still have to hack your own variant of Android, so would they have really been better off? If they couldn't build the OS, would they be able to build their own Sense or Touchwiz? It doesn't matter how slick your hardware is; if you totally botch the bloatware, nobody is going to buy it.

Edited 2013-07-29 23:58 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Stop whining!
by jello on Tue 30th Jul 2013 00:31 UTC in reply to "RE: Stop whining!"
jello Member since:
2006-08-08

The problem is not that they didn't have much luck creating their own OS. They could have hired the right people in order to fix that. (development, marketing etc.)

The problem is that they gave up control to another company. Now they are like peasants that gave up farming - depending on someone else to feed them. (...but they had enough money to buy seeds on their own and be self sustainable)

Reply Score: 6

RE[3]: Stop whining!
by lucas_maximus on Tue 30th Jul 2013 07:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Stop whining!"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

It depends what the company culture is. I work as a web dev in a large gambling company, but I work in "operations" and I don't have any clout with IT Infrastructure so basically any request I want sorted takes weeks of negotiation.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Stop whining!
by Fergy on Tue 30th Jul 2013 11:50 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Stop whining!"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

I work as a web dev in a large gambling company

You could still be talking about Nokia ;)

Reply Score: 10

RE[5]: Stop whining!
by lucas_maximus on Tue 30th Jul 2013 17:16 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Stop whining!"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

What passes for jokes on here is horrific.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Stop whining!
by TechGeek on Tue 30th Jul 2013 02:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Stop whining!"
TechGeek Member since:
2006-01-14

Uhh, Symbian was doing well up to the point that Nokia killed it. Before its decline in 2009, they had around 50% of the market share. The reason it died was Nokia announcing that it was dead. While Nokia did other things wrong, the software was not the problem. They did so poorly with Qt that a lot of projects have been switching over to it. Elop kill Nokia, no doubt about it.

Edited 2013-07-30 02:15 UTC

Reply Score: 6

RE[3]: Stop whining!
by przemo_li on Tue 30th Jul 2013 09:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Stop whining!"
przemo_li Member since:
2010-06-01

What 2009????

Get the facts straight first:

Q1 2010 . . 22.7 Million smartphones . . 42% market share . . 3.4B Euro Revenues . . +350M E profit
Q2 2010 . . 25.2 Million smartphones . . 41% market share . . 3.5B Euro Revenues . . +283M E profit
Q3 2010 . . 27.1 Million smartphones . . 34% market share . . 3.6B Euro Revenues . . +335M E profit *
Q4 2010 . . 28.6 Million smartphones . . 29% market share . . 4.4B Euro Revenues . . +548M E profit

As You can see NOBODY killed Symbian in Nokia. In fact Elop managed to show its true strength in Q3/4 2010...

And then in Q1 2011 called Symbian "burning platform". That is what killed Symbian.

(FYI, those number are ONLY Symbian...)

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: Stop whining!
by Nelson on Tue 30th Jul 2013 11:59 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Stop whining!"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

The idea that a fucking memo killed SYMBIAN is the most monumentally stupid idea I've ever heard of. This is unreal.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Stop whining!
by Vanders on Tue 30th Jul 2013 12:27 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Stop whining!"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

Really? It was a great example of the Ratner Effect with a little bit of Osborne effect thrown in for good measure. "Not doing that" is the kind of thing they teach you in MBA school, precisely because of people like Gerald Ratner, Adam Osborne and now Stephen Elop.

Reply Score: 10

RE[6]: Stop whining!
by MOS6510 on Tue 30th Jul 2013 12:47 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Stop whining!"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

I don't think the average Symbian buyer knows who Elop is or what he has said, but I think we can be certain his remarks didn't cause more Symbian phones to be sold.

And we must not forget those great WP 7.5 Lumia's that got stuck on 7.8, unable to move up to WP8. Had I known that in advance I wouldn't have bought one.

It's rather annoying to read an article about a new app, only to get a "your device is not supported" message when you try to install it.

Reply Score: 4

RE[6]: Stop whining!
by Nelson on Tue 30th Jul 2013 14:18 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Stop whining!"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I can buy an accelerated demise, or even a slow down in sales but to be the single cause for its demise is unfounded even by the Ratner and Osborne effect. I suggest you do some reading, or learning, given that you brought up business school.

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Stop whining!
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 30th Jul 2013 14:24 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Stop whining!"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Symbian sales were rising.

Then Elop announced the death of the platform.

Then sales dropped for the first time.

From growth, to dropping.

Do you deny these plain and cold facts?

Reply Score: 8

RE[7]: Stop whining!
by Vanders on Tue 30th Jul 2013 16:42 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Stop whining!"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

I can buy an accelerated demise, or even a slow down in sales but to be the single cause for its demise is unfounded even by the Ratner and Osborne effect.

Oh certainly, Nokia's inability to develop Symbian further, and their inability to produce a convincing migration plan, certainly didn't help. But the "Burning Platform" memo is probably the single largest cause of the cliff-like drop off of Symbian sales at that time.

I suggest you do some reading, or learning, given that you brought up business school.

What, precisely, would you suggest I need to read and learn? The analysts reports which almost all mention the "Burning Platform" memo as a factor in the drop in sales of the Symbian platform? The text of the memo itself[1], with such Ratneresque gems as "The first iPhone shipped in 2007, and we still don’t have a product that is close to their experience." or a quote Osborne would be proud of "We thought MeeGo would be a platform for winning high-end smartphones. However, at this rate, by the end of 2011, we might have only one MeeGo product in the market."?

While I agree with you that a lot of people have misunderstood what Burning Platform was all about, the fact is that Elop said and did some things that made a lot of people nervous about the future of Nokia.

[1]: http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2011/02/09/full-text-nokia-ceo-ste...

Edited 2013-07-30 16:44 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Stop whining!
by gagol on Tue 30th Jul 2013 05:18 UTC in reply to "RE: Stop whining!"
gagol Member since:
2012-05-16

If Nokia strength is on hardware, the bad news here is it became a commodity some time ago. On a software side of things, open-source is sailing winds those days with few exception. The thing is, they sailed away from their core competence long ago and took ages to realize it. Too bad, I had more Nokias than anything else before but I am not in the market anymore... good luck with that.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Stop whining!
by Fergy on Tue 30th Jul 2013 11:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Stop whining!"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

If Nokia strength is on hardware, the bad news here is it became a commodity some time ago. On a software side of things, open-source is sailing winds those days with few exception. The thing is, they sailed away from their core competence long ago and took ages to realize it. Too bad, I had more Nokias than anything else before but I am not in the market anymore... good luck with that.

I disagree. Build quality is what sells HTC One's. A good camera is what sells lumia 720s. I wish Nokia would take a few Windows Phones and just put Android on them and sell them in secret on a almost impossible to find website. Like developer devices.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Stop whining!
by przemo_li on Tue 30th Jul 2013 09:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Stop whining!"
przemo_li Member since:
2010-06-01

Bunch of crazy ideas:

Nokia had 2nd biggest app store with profits from this. (Second after Apple App Store).

Nokia had extensive partner ecosystem centred around Symbian.

Nokia had nice migration strategy for its own assets (Symbian, ivo store, qt, maps, ads, hardware division, software division, etc...), their partners business (which would not be disrupted), their carrier clients who liked Nokia headings...

Nokia had great offering for their MOST LOYAL customers, including features Nokia LOYAL customers LOVED (QWERTY keyboards, strong sms, bluetooth, that actually is bluetooth-no-strings-attached).

Nokia had software platform that would continue to enable their crazy (and not so crazy) hardware development (cameras, physical designs, etc...).



In other words MeeGo (this is what I talk about), had EVERY ANSWER RIGHT for Nokia and their partners, and carriers interested in Nokia offerings, and Nokia loyal customers.

Only problem was that MeeGo had no LTE capability (and would not have before Nokia could offer it in WinP).




With WinP:

No Nokia owned app store, and no profits from it.

No Nokia partners. WinP is completely different game. Assets build around years of Symbian could not be reused by partners.

Hardware and software divisions since then been butchered. Other assets either discontinued, spinned off, or sold. Partner ecosystem is non-existing, and carriers hate and distrust WinP as too closly tied to Skype...

Nokia have BIG problems with keeping their users. (To the point where its easier for Nokia to get new user, than to get old one to buy another Nokia handset).

Nokia hardware, software, and designs efforts are strongly limited by what Microsoft is willing to certify for their WinP.

LTE is still no-no for Nokia as EU and USA market shares are too low.. (And other parts of the world are mainly 3G/2G...)




Add to it insult:
Nokia pre Elop did good job products/solutions wise, bad management wise (stronger leadership hence was seen as needed remedy).

After Elop took charge, for few first quarters (and now with NSN), he did good job restructuring, and focusing Nokia efforts (those RECORD PROFITS and GROWTHS...), and then he destroyed that gains (and Nokia brand as a brand) by declaring Nokia products/solutions obsolete/crap/inferior, etc...

So Nokia instead of getting better management, got jerk who fail at 101 of management (Never, ever, ever call your own products bad, never, ever, ever call your product obsolete unless you already have successor ready, never, ever, ever call your product dead in the water, on the day before its launch...)


But You can focus on "but android ..." if you like to ignore real problems.

Reply Score: 9

Nokia's true tech scandal
by jphamlore on Tue 30th Jul 2013 00:17 UTC
jphamlore
Member since:
2011-02-15

It's incredible to me how little coverage has been given to the true tech scandal of Nokia: Nokia was brought low by under-investment years before Elop was even hired. Nokia's core technical competence, what distinguished it from almost all other companies, was Nokia's expertise across the entire wireless hardware stack. And then Nokia stopped investing in its core hardware competency.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/technology/07nokia.html?_r=0

"As handset manufacturing has evolved, wireless modems are increasingly being included in larger, multifunction chipsets along with the phone engine, applications processor, power manager and software."

Nokia failed to invest in a modern ARM SoC unlike Qualcomm, Samsung, Apple, etc. Nokia failed to invest in an LTE chipset unlike Qualcomm, Samsung, Huawei, etc. Nokia knew by 2008 they were going to lose their fab partner Texas Instruments. Nokia also knew a patent cross-license agreement with Qualcomm was going to expire, was drawn into litigation, and eventually had to make a payment of around $2.3 billion USD to Qualcomm to settle the case.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/oct/17/business/fi-qualcomm17

So the one company that just a few years ago could have gone toe-to-toe with Qualcomm in IP, and was an existential threat therefore to Qualcomm's IP licensing business, was suddenly left at Qualcomm's mercy having to buy its chips from Qualcomm.

Nokia also had the brilliant idea to ally with Intel promoting WiMAX instead of developing LTE compatibility with Verizon like Ericsson did. Great timing to advocate a technology WiMAX that was hyped to possibly disintermediate the carriers in the decade following 9/11.

Reply Score: 14

RE: Nokia's true tech scandal
by przemo_li on Tue 30th Jul 2013 09:51 UTC in reply to "Nokia's true tech scandal"
przemo_li Member since:
2010-06-01

Q1 2010 . . 22.7 Million smartphones . . 42% market share . . 3.4B Euro Revenues . . +350M E profit
Q2 2010 . . 25.2 Million smartphones . . 41% market share . . 3.5B Euro Revenues . . +283M E profit
Q3 2010 . . 27.1 Million smartphones . . 34% market share . . 3.6B Euro Revenues . . +335M E profit *
Q4 2010 . . 28.6 Million smartphones . . 29% market share . . 4.4B Euro Revenues . . +548M E profit

And current NSN affairs, show that Nokia only lacked good MANAGEMENT.

(You know like not calling its own products "burning platform", not announcing successor to obsolete products when its not ready, not announcing discontinuation product on the first day of sales REGARDLESS of how well it will do)

Reply Score: 1

I've been disappointed that Nokia
by ronaldst on Tue 30th Jul 2013 02:11 UTC
ronaldst
Member since:
2005-06-29

can't customise the UI themselves (other than that little dab on the Lock screen). They could, especially, spruce up the Live Tile screen.

Reply Score: 2

Nokia and Qualcomm were mortal enemies
by jphamlore on Tue 30th Jul 2013 02:59 UTC
jphamlore
Member since:
2011-02-15

The tech press, especially United States press, totally missed the Nokia/Qualcomm IP war story. That must not be allowed to happen again.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/08/17/nokia-qualcomm-idUSL17223...

Here's an example of the outrageously ignorant coverage of the case, coverage that left readers without information over who was winning. One would never have guessed that within a year Nokia would be cutting a check to Qualcomm for about $2.3 billion USD.

http://www.forbes.com/2007/12/13/qualcomm-nokia-patent-markets-equi...

This article claims that Nokia got a special deal

http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/24/technology/qualcomm-royalty.fortune...

yet subsequent events show that Nokia took no action that indicated it received such a special deal. Nokia was not able to re-enter the US markets in force until it was using Qualcomm ARM SoCs and LTE chipsets. Furthermore, after this settlement, Nokia sold off its wireless modem business for only about $200 million USD.

Reply Score: 3

Nokia/TI in 2002 versus 6 years later
by jphamlore on Tue 30th Jul 2013 03:15 UTC
jphamlore
Member since:
2011-02-15

This was Nokia and TI in 2002, a complete 2.5G and 3G solution, hardware and software reference platform. They owned the IP for the entire stack.

http://newscenter.ti.com/index.php?s=32851&item=125951

And this is Nokia and TI 6 years later, well before Elop joined Nokia:

http://www.sramanamitra.com/2009/08/13/texas-instruments-recent-wir...

Note the massive decline at TI's wireless division in 2007 and 2008 well before Elop took over at Nokia. Nokia had already switched to a multi-vendor strategy which robbed TI of revenue and made TI's exit from that business very easy, which it promptly announced.

By 2008, Nokia knew its relationship with its major fab partner TI was coming to an end. Consider how it appears Apple will be unable to end its relationship with Samsung as a fab partner, for given Apple's volumes and need for the latest technology, the number of potential fab partners is extremely small.

Reply Score: 3

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

There is a bit more to the story, TI had already announced their intentions to become a fabless outfit by then.

Edited 2013-07-30 04:18 UTC

Reply Score: 2

jphamlore Member since:
2011-02-15

History merely repeated itself which makes Nokia's failure to anticipate Texas Instruments' leaving the business even more mystifying. TI had already demonstrated it was unwilling to absorb the risk of paying for itself the cost of the newest fabs just to satisfy a customer in its former relationship with Sun. TI's business model is based around dominating segments, such as I believe today analog, not trying to slug it out risking untold billions in fabs.

There was a time when Sun's fabless strategy looked like genius, back when there were more candidate fabs, especially in the US. And then there weren't because good business relationship don't work like that with one party assuming all the risk and the other freeloading. Sun had a programming language Java which it had tailored for multi-threading, and it had machines it was trying to design to exploit large numbers of threads, but found itself unable to produce those machines because it had failed to develop suitable long-lasting relationships with fab partners.

Reply Score: 3

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

IMO the view inside the industry is not as "dramatic" as you're making it out to be. Most of the issues with SUN's own chips in the past half decade were not due to the choice of fab partner.

And although SUN did indeed rely on TI for most of their own SPARC product, there were still plenty of 3rd party SPARC parts manufactured elsewhere. They are now getting their Niagara parts from TSMC, although they are named Oracle now, not SUN.

Reply Score: 2

Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

If being fabless is bad, how does that explain ARM?

Reply Score: 4

Nokia's awesome alliance with Intel
by jphamlore on Tue 30th Jul 2013 03:29 UTC
jphamlore
Member since:
2011-02-15

Let us not forget that during the mid 2000s, Nokia decided to ally itself with Intel on WiMAX and other initiatives. And how did Intel repay Nokia?

What Nokia needed first was a fab partner to replace Texas Instruments. I have read nothing to indicate Intel ever offered Nokia the use of Intel's fabs.

And while Intel and Nokia were working on Meego, Intel hired Mike Bell in July 2010 to begin a skunkworks phone project at Intel for an ANDROID phone:

http://www.wired.com/business/2012/08/ff_intel/all/

"And so in July 2010, three months after the release of the iPad, Otellini brought in Bell ... He hired a huge number of Android software developers to adapt Google’s open source mobile operating system so it could run apps on the Intel phone. One month after Bell was hired, Intel paid $1.4 billion to acquire German chipmaker Infineon Technologies’ wireless division." Nokia hired Elop in September 2010. Intel had already planned to jump ship to Android before Elop was even hired at Nokia.

And what was Intel doing for Meego which Nokia needed as a successor to Symbian?

http://taskumuro.com/artikkelit/the-story-of-nokia-meego

"In addition to the lack of LTE support, another MeeGo developer described that Intel was trying to slow down the development of MeeGo on its own part. MeeGo was designed to support both x86 and ARM architectures, and the hardware adaptation of Intel’s Atom SoC mated with MeeGo, codenamed Ilmatar, wasn’t ready yet."

Reply Score: 6

v why not drop microsoft ???????
by user78 on Tue 30th Jul 2013 05:20 UTC
RE: why not drop microsoft ???????
by bentoo on Wed 31st Jul 2013 16:34 UTC in reply to "why not drop microsoft ???????"
bentoo Member since:
2012-09-21

IN MY OPINION THEY CAN SWITCH OS AGAIN AND TRIED THIS AGAIN AND GO WITH THE FLOW OF SUCCESS.......3 CHOICES THEY ARE GOING TO MAKE...
1. ANDROID OS (NOT NOKIA STYLE TO USED BUT ITS VERY SUCCESSFUL)
2. SAMSUNG TIZEN OS (MIGHT BECOME SUCCESSFUL IN LONGRUN)
3. BLACKBERRY 10 (THIS MIGHT BE THE WINNER SINCE BOTH NOKIA AND BB SHARES SIMILARITY ON DEVICES ABILITIES SINCE BOTH ARE VERY MATURE THIS POINT IN THE MARKET)


Why not iOS? Apple seems to be doing well with it. ;)

Reply Score: 2

Thanks Captain Obvious
by chithanh on Tue 30th Jul 2013 07:25 UTC
chithanh
Member since:
2006-06-18

That VP should be promoted to Captain Obvious.

There has got to be a reason why Lumia sells so poorly. It's not the hardware or features, these are universally liked. It's not Nokia's brand image. It's not Nokia's carrier relations, these were the best in the industry right until the announcement of Symbian death. It's not marketing either, you would see entire cities plastered with Lumia posters at every launch. It's not Thom and the other evil tech writers dissing Lumia phones, as they get very high ratings in reviews.

So the poor sales have got to do with Windows Phone, and it is good that at least someone at Nokia woke up to this.

I will quote one commenter from the Inquirer article[1] who put it best:
The mistake is yours! Don't point finger at them. What stopped you from releasing both windows and android phones? like Samsung? Nokia Lumia has (arguably) the best hardware in the market, but your business strategy and bureaucracy lead you to dead end now.

[1] http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2285336/nokia-blames-micro...

Reply Score: 10

RE: Thanks Captain Obvious
by Lobotomik on Tue 30th Jul 2013 08:10 UTC in reply to "Thanks Captain Obvious"
Lobotomik Member since:
2006-01-03

So it is indeed an extremely big marketing problem. Plastering cities with Lumia posters is publicity, not marketing. Choosing going only with Windows for all segments is marketing.

Reply Score: 4

Do not be surprised by Microsoft tactics
by acobar on Tue 30th Jul 2013 08:21 UTC
acobar
Member since:
2005-11-15

I would not be surprised if the "dragging feet" could be linked to some MS strategy. As far as I remember, MS relationship with big companies has always been a kind of "going to total domination" or assimilation.

Granted, I don't think they want to buy Nokia, they could do it some time ago after the PR blunt of Elop sent Nokia value to its lowest, but, perhaps, MS dream is to repeat the kind of partners subservience they had with "MS Windows", only that at this time it does not sounds possible.

Reply Score: 5

jphamlore
Member since:
2011-02-15

The sad truth is that Nokia found itself without the suppliers to greatly expand N9 production nor build on the N9's success. Nokia simply ran out of ways to keep making its old phones.

According to

http://taskumuro.com/artikkelit/the-story-of-nokia-meego

"In October 2008 Texas Instruments announced that they would stop investing in smartphones’ baseband modems and that they were looking for someone to purchase the wireless department ... For Nokia this meant the end of the TI OMAP path for MeeGo, because the company had decided to buy the smartphone chipsets, that is the application processor and the baseband modem from the same vendor."

The lifespan for Nokia phones based on TI OMAP was not going to be long, especially since:

http://www.sramanamitra.com/2009/08/13/texas-instruments-recent-wir...

"TI expects revenue from baseband to come to zero by the end of 2012."

Note the above article was written in August 13, 2009, more than a YEAR before Elop was hired at Nokia, and the article is talking about how TI expected to zero out it baseband business by the end of 2012. Nokia was simply going to be cut off. Nokia could not have greatly expanded N9 production even if it wanted to because its fab partner had clearly indicated it was exiting the baseband business by the end of 2012.

At the time of 2010, the only alternative that met Nokia's requirements of a vendor who could supply all of what Nokia wanted was Nokia's mortal enemy Qualcomm, a company Nokia had only recently made a massive $2.3 billion USD payment to settling multi-year litigation perhaps more heated than today's Apple vs Samsung struggle.

Sampsa Kurri claims that Qualcomm did offer its chips for Nokia-based OSes, but "Qualcomm would have offered to do the hardware adaptation, that is the lowest level of the software that connects the operating system to the chipset, but wouldn’t help developing the operating system ... however Qualcomm probably had not prioritized MeeGo very high compared to other projects such as Android and Windows Phone."

But another complication had arisen for Nokia continuing by itself. Verizon's adoption of LTE had forced AT&T to launch a similar effort.

According to CNET, by 2010 AT&T was demanding support for LTE, even forcing Microsoft to greatly accelerate its schedule for LTE support:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57408903-94/how-at-t-nokia-pulled-...

"AT&T was looking for a unique device suitable for its customers, but its principal hang-up was the lack of 4G LTE support, which was a dealbreaker."

Nokia's failure in the 2000s to invest in either a modern ARM SoC like Apple did, an integrated LTE baseband chip like Qualcomm did, or another fab partner to replace Texas Instruments resulted in Nokia's being unable to even continue its status quo of selling older phones, let alone have a path for selling more advanced smartphones.

Reply Score: 3

cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Meego on snapdragon: http://wiki.meego.com/ARM/MSMQSD

Its Linux, it runs everywhere with little work :-)

Reply Score: 4

jphamlore Member since:
2011-02-15

Last I heard the successor to Meego, Sailfish/Jolla, was going to use ST-Ericsson chips:

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/jolla-unveils-first-smartphone-...

"Jolla had announced a chipset deal in November with ST-Ericsson, the joint venture that Ericsson (NASDAQ:ERIC) and STMicroelectronics agreed to shut down in March."

Reply Score: 2

Comment by typeo
by typeo on Tue 30th Jul 2013 16:02 UTC
typeo
Member since:
2008-12-12

My employer had a Lumia 800 device on trial which I handily managed to borrow. I think the O/S is quite good, there were some quirks with it however the way the WinPho8 upgrade was handled was poor. I still use the device on occasion now and it's only ever had one update for the O/S to 7.8. While I know major updates aren't going to happen I thought they may have released more trivial incremental updates to fix minor issues.

BB10 in comparison is on it's 2nd update since the version when the device was released. Even if the changes in the incremental updates aren't major they are noticeable and worthwhile changes.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by typeo
by jphamlore on Tue 30th Jul 2013 19:36 UTC in reply to "Comment by typeo"
jphamlore Member since:
2011-02-15

I think Blackberry formerly RIM is the perfect illustration of how self-defeating the mobile device strategy was of trying to cut costs by not having one's own ARM SoC. Just since 2008, now Blackberry is using Marvell's chips, now it's using Texas Instruments' chips, and finally it has switched to Qualcomm.

The business theory of sucking one supplier dry then moving on to the next only works if there are still suppliers left who are willing to work at a cheaper price, who are reasonably up-to-date in technology, and who have the scale for one's business.

While Blackberry was wasting time switching SoCs while also switching to a new OS, an Apple could concentrate on optimizing its software for its own hardware, with one hardware switch from Infineon to Qualcomm baseband chipsets.

Reply Score: 3

Hmm
by NuxRo on Tue 30th Jul 2013 21:26 UTC
NuxRo
Member since:
2010-09-25

I'd love to see Nokia make a comeback! And for this they need to sell Android devices..

Reply Score: 2

jphamlore
Member since:
2011-02-15

I invite people to read the following site for a perspective on the history from Ericsson's view:

http://www.ericssonhistory.com/changing-the-world/The-future-is-now...

As late as 2007, it was not clear that LTE would be the winner over WiMAX, in fact, it appeared that WiMAX might beat LTE to market. But this just shows the importance for companies to make the right decision in consultation with the players who matter. In this case, it was Ericsson who worked with the US major telecoms, in particular Verizon, to make the future of LTE happen, to help create the future.

Ericsson's reward is to win massive contracts for equipment and support that will last for over a decade or more with the major US telecoms in their switchover to LTE, and at some point their switchover to LTE advanced.

Fortunately for Nokia another major opportunity is opening in China with China begging European companies to help China establish TD-LTE as an equal competitor to FDD-LTE.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2013-07/03/content_16716093.h...

Ironically TD-LTE is using spectrum similar to what WiMAX was supposed to use. And if only Nokia had kept more of its wireless modem expertise. Still, the only way forward appears for Nokia to do what it did: buy out Siemens for the rest of Nokia Siemens Network and bet the company on that.

Reply Score: 2

Funny Funeral
by fretinator on Tue 30th Jul 2013 21:53 UTC
fretinator
Member since:
2005-07-06

It's funny to listen to all the Symbianologists fomenting about the platform demise - it was Elop and his disappearing platform shoes. No, it was the early Windows phones that forgot how to grow at age 7.8.

I'll settle it for you once and for all - THE BUTLER DID IT! Now go pay your respects, get some crackers and cheese, and have a seat.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Funny Funeral
by bentoo on Wed 31st Jul 2013 16:29 UTC in reply to "Funny Funeral"
bentoo Member since:
2012-09-21

I'll settle it for you once and for all - THE BUTLER DID IT! Now go pay your respects, get some crackers and cheese, and have a seat.



But was the butler a plant from Microsoft whose ultra secret goal was to overthrow the vast MeeGo empire? ;)

Reply Score: 3

Time for replicant.
by crhylove on Wed 31st Jul 2013 05:53 UTC
crhylove
Member since:
2010-04-10

Bypass Google altogether with all open source. Merge the best parts of Cyanogenmod with Replicant, release it natively.

Profit.

Reply Score: 1

So what is the threat?
by Codester on Wed 31st Jul 2013 10:14 UTC
Codester
Member since:
2008-10-24

"As a company we don't want to rely on somebody else and sit and wait for them to get it right."

I guess it is too late for them to worry Microsoft about using a homegrown OS, since they have killed 3 development efforts.

But if they go with Android they have to "rely on somebody else". Could they be thinking about purchasing the Maemo/Meego startup?

Reply Score: 2

Selling points?
by aqd- on Wed 31st Jul 2013 14:37 UTC
aqd-
Member since:
2009-02-16

Why would anyone choose Nokia Lumia today? or any WP7/8-based phones? Nokia's phone hardware is no longer superior to others, and WP8 is more like BB10 without unique features or iOS with only 1% of its apps.

Reply Score: 0

Old Guy's thoughts....
by Digihooman on Thu 1st Aug 2013 00:49 UTC
Digihooman
Member since:
2010-05-01

As a non-techy pensioner watching this from the sidelines I think Nokia is a sinking ship, they probably were before the Microsoft invasion. The "Elop insertion" just increased the rate of descent and my determination to get myself an N9 "before all the good phones were gone" (they didn't last long in Brisbane).
The only dogs I have in the tech wars are my cash and my passions (Linux zealot) and I will expend neither on any Microsoft product if I can help it.
So I suppose all that could be re-stated as a question....
Am I the only person who dislikes Microsoft enough to not give them money, even if it hurts Nokia ?
Or perhaps a short statement....
I will never buy a Nokia product with a Microsoft operating system.
Thanks for reading.

Reply Score: 1

jphamlore
Member since:
2011-02-15

Everyone interested in honest debate should read Michael Copeland's article "An Empire Strikes Back: Intel Muscles Into the Mobile Market" at Wired.com.

http://www.wired.com/business/2012/08/ff_intel/all/

Nokia's Meego partner Intel had already decided by July 2010, before Elop was hired at Nokia, that it was going to hire Mike Bell, a veteran of Apple and then Palm, and give him almost unlimited resources and almost unlimited control over his team to produce an Intel-hardware ANDROID phone from scratch. It had already been announced to the public that Intel was going to buy Infineon's Wireless Solutions Business before Elop was hired at Nokia. Intel had already decided that Meego was dead and that Android was the future for Intel phones before Elop was even hired at Nokia.

The entire reason it was Meego and not Nokia's Maemo was the alliance with Intel which was already dead in spirit by July 2010, at least on Intel's side. With Intel acquiring Infineon's unit, there was absolutely nothing Nokia had left that was of interest to Intel. It certainly was not in Intel's interest to create another phone OS for an ARM-based phone.

Reply Score: 1