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 462142
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: So
by nt_jerkface on Fri 11th Feb 2011 17:36 UTC in reply to "So"
Member since:

Microsoft just killed off an up and coming competitor Linux OS, and dealt a severe blow to the most promising application development platform on Linux (Qt)

Microsoft didn't kill off anything. Nokia screwed up by partnering with Intel who has just been experimenting with how far they can take x86.

Nokia should have focused on ARM from the beginning and let another company experiment with pint sized 486 phones. Note that Microsoft had zero interest in pushing a WP7 atom phone despite their history with Intel and x86. I suspect they had concerns over power consumption and went the safe route.

Nokia has also had internal problems. They have plenty of engineers on staff so that usually means management.

Reply Parent Score: 3