Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 20th Jun 2013 18:29 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless So, The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Microsoft was very close to take over Nokia, but that the talks eventually broke down, probably beyond repair - at least for now. The reasons the talks broke down illustrate something that I have repeatedly tried to make clear for a long time now: Nokia isn't doing well.
Thread beginning with comment 565317
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: What it could have been..
by cdude on Sat 22nd Jun 2013 13:00 UTC in reply to "What it could have been.."
cdude
Member since:
2008-09-21

The central question is still why Elop's Nokia went all-in. HTC, Huawei, Samsung all doing WP and Android. Samsung, back then way smaller then Nokia, even Bada and Tizen. Samsung applied then the same strategy Nokia had bringing the featurephone platform Bada and the own platform Tizen together, an upgradepath. Android apps run there, so did they run under MeeGo. Nokia even had QT which bridges to Android. All thrown under the bus and reset for a, back then unproven new, platform. One they have zero control over. One with zero upgradepath, synergy. Why? They could have done WP without burning everything else and closing all the doors they need now. It was not needed and it kills them now. Why they STILL only do WP even now and still not build any bridges to S40 Smarterphone Asha. Why that suicide strategy?

Edited 2013-06-22 13:05 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: What it could have been..
by jeffb on Sat 22nd Jun 2013 13:35 in reply to "RE: What it could have been.."
jeffb Member since:
2005-07-19

The central question is still why Elop's Nokia went all-in.


Because Microsoft paid them $250m per quarter for an exclusive. That was far more than they were likely to make in the Android market. Selling stuff is nice. Getting the profit for not selling stuff is better.

Reply Parent Score: 3