Linked by David Adams on Sun 14th Jul 2013 17:49 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless A perennial question that revolves around Nokia is: why didn't it choose to go with Android to replace Symbian when it decided to kill that as its smartphone operating system in late 2010?
Permalink for comment 567158
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

So actually, no, I'm not lying thank you very much. This is why I ask people to read the financial reports. What a new and radical idea, asking you to do your own research.

You're spinning again. This is what you said:

"This whole 'Osborn Effect' thing is overblown, Symbian sales were collapsing a full quarter prior to the Windows Phone announcement."

...but now, you're suddenly talking about market share collapsing. Those are two different things. Symbian sales were still rising quite steadily and quite well, up until Elop Osbourned his own company.

So yes, you were lying.

You may argue that market share is more important - and you might very well be right - but that would be quite inconsistent of you, because when you point out that Nokia's Windows Phone sales are rising (every so slightly), and I consequently point out that Nokia's/WP's market share is NOT rising, you argue that market share doesn't matter as much as mildly rising sales.

This takes critical thinking.

We call that spinning.

Edited 2013-07-15 11:43 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4