Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 11th Feb 2011 11:35 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless A lot of people are wondering why Nokia didn't choose to go with Android. How can Nokia differentiate themselves when Android is a lot more open and free than Windows Phone 7? As usual, the key to this is in the details. If you read the announcements carefully, you'll see that Microsoft offered Nokia something Google most likely didn't. Update: What a surprise. Elop just confirmed Nokia has a special deal with Microsoft. Whereas HTC, Samsung, and so on are not allowed to customise WP7 - Nokia is, further confirming my theory.
Permalink for comment 462131
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: So
by segedunum on Fri 11th Feb 2011 17:22 UTC in reply to "RE: So"
Member since:

Qt has been up and coming and promising for years now. Nothing has materialised out of it. An absolutely great development environment, BUT NOBODY IS USING IT. I don't understand how this doesn't get into people's brains.

What doesn't get into peoples' thick skulls is that Nokia was bloody useless at creating a development platform because they wanted to somehow protect Symbian. It wasn't that Qt was no good at all.

You don't solve having little in the way of a developer community and reacting to the competition by selling off your development platform to someone else.

.NET on the other hand...

Speaking of zero presence......and that's on a platform that Microsoft controls.

Reply Parent Score: 2