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.
Thread beginning with comment 461961
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
a merger by any other name
by unclefester on Fri 11th Feb 2011 11:55 UTC
unclefester
Member since:
2007-01-13

Basically MS and Nokia have merged. Nokia gets free software and MS gets a phone hardware division.

Cheap Chinese phones will totally dominate the Android market. They already cost less than $100 in China. A super-cheap open hardware platform for Android phones is also being developed in China.

Nokia would be committing a slow suicide by selling Android phones.

Reply Score: 4

RE: a merger by any other name
by fatjoe on Fri 11th Feb 2011 13:27 in reply to "a merger by any other name"
fatjoe Member since:
2010-01-12

You call it a merger, I call it a hostile take over, orchestrated by Microsofts inside man Elop.

I see zero benefit for Nokia in this.
Nokia didn't get software for "free". They already had their own software that they now have to ditch. The cost of this technology shift will be huge, specially to a company that is used to control every aspect of hw and sw.

Nokia is however giving their own software [Ovi maps etc] to Microsoft for free.


[also, this is a sad day for OSS, specially the Qt people]

Reply Parent Score: 13

nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

The main benefit is not encouraging a 2 party market.

By using WP7 they can get a good deal with MS for a cut of the profits while not encouraging further adoption of Android. They can take advantage of MS and use WP7 to divide the market. A fragmented market would be much easier for them to enter later with their own OS than one dominated by two systems.

Hopefully they made a deal with MS to bring Qt to WP7.

Reply Parent Score: 3

unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

You have absolutely no idea how companies work if you think this is some sort of sneaky takeover. It would have been negotiated at the highest level over many months (perhaps several years) with full Nokia and MS board approval.

The board of Nokia is interested in the preservation of shareholder capital not maintaining Qt or Meego.

There is no future profit in dumb phones.

Ultra cheap phones are going to dominate the Android user base.

Many cheap phones by Samsung etc are nothing but rebranded Chinese made generics.

Reply Parent Score: 4

unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

The boards of companies are legally obliged to maximise shareholder wealth. That may mean a merger or takeover is necessary.

Modern corporations such as Nokia are controlled by professional funds management companies and pension funds. They are totally unsentimental.

Nokia has already been transformed from a paper and rubber manufacturing company to a telecommunications company.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: a merger by any other name
by segedunum on Fri 11th Feb 2011 17:00 in reply to "a merger by any other name"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Basically MS and Nokia have merged.

Mergers are never truly mergers. ;-)

Reply Parent Score: 3

Spot On
by shotsman on Sat 12th Feb 2011 08:00 in reply to "RE: a merger by any other name"
shotsman Member since:
2005-07-22

Remember DEC & Compaq Merged?
Nope. Compaq took over lock stock & rotten barrel.

Reply Parent Score: 2