Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 1st Feb 2012 22:24 UTC
Permalink for comment 505577
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/20/13 6:17 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 23:02 UTC, submitted by M.Onty
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 22:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-04
Nominally Nokia was looking for a differentiator to distinguish their products from the others in the marketplace and thus increase sales by virtue of that distinctiveness. That was the explanation given for why they wouldn't go with Android.
There was an article in Forbes awhile back saying that Nokia wanted a deal with Google that gave them advantages that other handset makers didn't have and Google told them no. This was spun as Google telling them they couldn't license Android. Obviously that is incorrect. Maybe they couldn't license the Android logo/name, but the code is freely downloadable and there are many forks of it already.
So now they have a phone OS that they have special rights to that other handset makers don't.
But wait! Wasn't that going to be the problem that would kill Android when Google bid for Motorola? o-:)