bit-tech.net

Microsoft acquires Nokia's mobile arm

Microsoft acquires Nokia's mobile arm

Microsoft is to acquire Nokia's entire mobile phone business, putting the company in direct competition with its own Windows Phone licensees for the first time.

Microsoft has acquired the devices division of Nokia in an all-cash deal valued at €5.44 billion, a move that will see Microsoft once again entering into direct competition with its own customers.

Nokia, once a world leader in the mobile phone market, has had a tough few years. Symbian, its home-brew pride-and-joy mobile operating system, has long been outclassed by bash young upstarts like Apple's iOS and Google's Android, and attempts by the company to join in on the smartphone explosion - such as with the N900, which ran a Linux derivative dubbed Maemo - didn't go well.

The answer, suggested by current chief executive and former Microsoft employee Stephen Elop, was to ditch its own-brand software and license in someone else's - and to no surprise, Elop chose Windows Phone from his former paymaster. Entering into a tight relationship with Microsoft - a relationship which has seen several former Microsoft staffers take on executive roles at the company - Nokia launched the Lumia family of Windows Phone devices, the first Nokia phones ever to come with a non-Nokia operating system.

That turns out to have been the smartest move the company could have made: its market share, which had been sinking fast, has begun to rise as buyers pick up the aggressively-priced and feature-rich Lumia devices. It also, however, gave Microsoft considerable control over the future of the company - control it is now exercising by acquiring Nokia's entire mobile division in a €5.44 billion cash deal.

'It's a bold step into the future - a win-win for employees, shareholders and consumers of both companies. Bringing these great teams together will accelerate Microsoft's share and profits in phones, and strengthen the overall opportunities for both Microsoft and our partners across our entire family of devices and services,' claimed Steve Ballmer, Microsoft's outgoing chief executive, of the deal. 'In addition to their innovation and strength in phones at all price points, Nokia brings proven capability and talent in critical areas such as hardware design and engineering, supply chain and manufacturing management, and hardware sales, marketing and distribution.'

Elop, naturally, was equally effusive about returning to the Microsoft fold - in which he will run the company's devices and services division, having announced plans to step down as Nokia's chief executive. 'Building on our successful partnership, we can now bring together the best of Microsoft's software engineering with the best of Nokia's product engineering, award-winning design, and global sales, marketing and manufacturing.'

The deal will see Microsoft taking full control over Nokia's Smart Devices and Mobile Phones business units, which produce the Lumia family of smartphones and low-cost featurephones respectively. Nokia, meanwhile, retains its telecommunications hardware business Nokia Siemens Networks, Here location-based services arm, and its patent portfolio under the Advanced Technologies division. These patents are to be licensed to Microsoft for at least a ten-year period, the agreement states.

For Microsoft, the acquisition does what the company had previously stated it had no intention of doing: herald the launch of Microsoft-brand smartphones, which will enter the market in direct competition with its Windows Phone licensees. It's a move that was telegraphed by the launch of the Surface family, which put the company in competition with its customers in the Windows 8 and Windows RT tablet markets - and saw many ditch the latter as a direct result.

For Nokia, it's the end of an era - but that's something the company should be used to: founded 150 years ago as a paper mill then turning into a rubber manufacturer and electricity provider before hitting on the idea of making mobile phones, Nokia has a history of reinventing itself to stay on top of technological trends - it's just going to do so now in a far less customer-facing manner.

138 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
Snips 3rd September 2013, 10:18 Quote
As an advocate of the WP7,7.8 and now WP8 (and soon 8.1) from my very first HTC Trophy, Samsung Omnia 7, Lumia 800, Lumia 900 and now Lumia 925, I think this is great move for both companies.

The whining about lack of apps (the only thing holding anyone back apparently) is now coming to a close with the apparent top 50 apps on all devices now available on WP. It's only the likes of Google and Apple who are restricting their brand apps even when Microsoft have done all the development and spent the money in creation. However, the alternatives available make up for any of that.

Smart move for both companies and can't wait for the my Lumia 1020 due later this month.
Gareth Halfacree 3rd September 2013, 10:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snips
Smart move for both companies and can't wait for the my Lumia 1020 due later this month.
The wife has a PureView 808 - same camera sensor, minus OIS, but running Symbian. The camera is absolutely *incredible.* I doubt you'll regret your decision! <kicks crappy Nexus 4 camera in disgust>
faugusztin 3rd September 2013, 10:25 Quote
Microsoft Trojan mission successfully completed. It will be awarded by CEO position at Microsoft :D. Seriously, MS bought Nokia for less than they bought Skype for - $7.17 billion for Nokia, $8.5 billion for Skype.

Well played Microsoft, well played.

PS: I wonder how quickly will MS get rid of Asha lineup, i would not be surprised if they would sell that part of the company to some Chinese company.
maverik-sg1 3rd September 2013, 10:55 Quote
There's no longer an issue with Apps, the phones are very good and the OS has evolved, I enjoy using my Android phone for personal use and Windows phone is ideal for work.

My immediate gut reaction raised a question:

If Microsoft are now a competitor in hardware sales won't this mean that other companies offering Windows powered phones will stick with Android?

But then I recalled that Google have been selling their own Android phones for an age, iOS is exclusive to Apple and Blackberry - they are all in a similar situation so it shouldn't have much of an impact.

.....it's probably going to cost shedloads in marketing, but Microsoft has a real opportunity to gain considerable market share.... it's a ballsy move and this competition should be good news for us consumers.
faugusztin 3rd September 2013, 11:06 Quote
No, situation is nowhere near similar. Motorola was and still is a minor player on global scale in Android phone market. Nokia on other side is the dominant player in the Windows Phone market. So yes, it will mean less interest in creating WP8 phones from other manufacturers, they will probably do them only to lower the patent licence fees from Microsoft for their phones with other OS. Just look at Samsung and their one Windows Phone 8 model, do you really think they take WP8 seriously ? They have ATIV S only because the agreement with MS said they need to release a WP8 phone.
Jaybles 3rd September 2013, 11:06 Quote
:'( I can only see this as a bad thing. I love my Lumia 800 not because of the OS but because its built like a Nokia. It has an awesome battery life for a smartie. Microsoft will turn this into a processing powerhouse war. The OS is my favourite in terms of UI but I wish I could customise a few things and that better integration with apps was possible.
barny2767 3rd September 2013, 11:07 Quote
I love my Lumia 920 and Microsoft and Nokia seem to have a close relationship with Windows Phone.

I just hope that Nokia stays Nokia and not SurfacePhone or something stupid like that since that, But I might bring good things to MS like Nokia's clean designs and reliable hardware.
impar 3rd September 2013, 11:07 Quote
Greetings!

For Microsoft its a great deal. Not so sure its the same for Nokia. 7,2B is a ridiculous low price too. Skype was bought for 8,5B....

Elop gets his reward, returning to Microsoft. Lots of other Nokia executives also get assimilated by Microsoft.
http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/3/4688800/steve-ballmer-nokia-acquisition-letter-microsoft-fte

Surprisingly, the guy in charge of Lumia devices design wont be assimilated:
http://www.engadget.com/2013/09/02/stephen-elop-stepping-down-as-nokia-ceo-risto-siilasmaa-takes-h/

All other WP/WRT makers (the surviving ones) have no reason to keep fighting Nokia for market share, its a lost battle. Regardless of how Microsoft spins it:
http://www.neowin.net/news/microsofts-os-leader-buying-lumia-will-help-other-windows-phone-oems

Interesting time in the mobile area now. Nokias WPs are finally present everywhere and, more importantly, at all prices ranges. Still a long battle to win Androids market share.
Feel a bit sad for those who bought a non-Nokia WP device lately, though.
Gareth Halfacree 3rd September 2013, 11:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by barny2767
I just hope that Nokia stays Nokia and not SurfacePhone or something stupid like that since that, But I might bring good things to MS like Nokia's clean designs and reliable hardware.
The Nokia name is toast; future devices will feature Microsoft's brand.
faugusztin 3rd September 2013, 11:09 Quote
@Gareth Halfacree: they got a licence to use Nokia name for 10 years. I think they will use Nokia for next year or so, then it will by Nokia by Microsoft for next 2 years, and just Microsoft after that.
Gareth Halfacree 3rd September 2013, 11:11 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by faugusztin
@Gareth Halfacree: they got a licence to use Nokia name for 10 years.
Actually, they haven't stated how long the licence lasts; the ten-year span is for the patent licensing, not the brand licensing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by faugusztin
I think they will use Nokia for next year or so, then it will by Nokia by Microsoft for next 2 years, and just Microsoft after that.
I reckon you're on the money with that time-frame.
j_jay4 3rd September 2013, 11:13 Quote
The beginning of the end for Windows Phone IMO. We all know MS can't sell hardware (Xbox excluded). Zune HD anyone? The Surface RT is the wrong form factor, should have been 7 inch and then a lot cheaper. 7 inch Windows 8.1 devices are coming out soon but only from MS OEMS and far too late to the party.

As a Lumia 800 owner what's putting me off getting a WP upgrade next month it's the lack of any device with a decent 4.5-5 inch 300 ppi display to rival the likes HTC One or Galaxy S4. This seems a long way off as this type of screen is not even supported in WP8's OS. I'm not too interested in carrying around a DSLR in my pocket regarding the Lumia 1020.

They are discussing targets for a 15% market share in 2018. In 2018 the mobile phone market will be very different. Around then MS will be kicking themselves (again) that they didn't release a smart watch.
Snips 3rd September 2013, 11:15 Quote
I also think the Nokia Brand still has a name for reliability, I hope they keep the name but it will probably just revert to the "WindowsPhone"

I think lower end, they can saturate the market with cheap but good quality phones. OS level, there really isn't much between a Lumia 520 to a Lumia 925.
Snips 3rd September 2013, 11:18 Quote
Have you tried the 925 j_jay4? It wipes the floor with the One and S4 and still has a the best (current) smartphone camera in the market. The 1020 is not like the S4Zoom, which is a DSLR in your pocket. The 1020 is slightly raised around the lens.
runadumb 3rd September 2013, 11:24 Quote
While I'm not surprised why did they bother? They "bought" Nokia 2 years ago when they went exclusive to Windows Phone. Nokia has been pumping out solid devices ever since with most of the complaints coming from the software side (especially recently as the 1025 runs the exactly the same OS as the last flagship).

So unless Nokia was in trouble this seemed like a pretty cosy relationship for Microsoft.

I did read The Verge interview with Ballmer and it has quotes like "perhaps acquisition would be a way to accelerate".
Accelerate what? New hardware is coming often from Nokia, and usually to a good spec, its the software that's sitting still. That's on Microsoft not Nokia.

Maybe they had some anti-competitive issue with working too closely with Nokia. So they can bring the hardware in house now and have teams work together more closely. We have seen how long that can take to bare fruit though going by Motorola and Google.
Not that I feel HTC or Samsung would give two hoots going by how little they seem to care about Windows Phone.
jrs77 3rd September 2013, 11:29 Quote
A once proud finnish trademark has now been sold out. I can only despise this decision as it will lead to some 30k unemployed in Finland during the next year.

Nokia would've done better, if they had decided to develop MeeGo (Nokia N9!). Microsoft Windows Phone simply isn't a very good mobile OS.

What we've seen today was just what I expected back then, when Nokia announced to go with Windows Phone.

Today Nokia finally died... *humming the finnish anthem in my head*
faugusztin 3rd September 2013, 11:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth Halfacree
Actually, they haven't stated how long the licence lasts; the ten-year span is for the patent licensing, not the brand licensing.I reckon you're on the money with that time-frame.

Unless NY Times have wrong info, because they are saying :
Quote:
The company will continue to do business as Nokia, licensing the Nokia name to Microsoft for use on its mobile phones for 10 years.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/03/technology/microsoft-gets-nokia-units-and-leader.html?_r=0

So does Financial Times:
Quote:
It also has agreed a 10-year licence agreement to use the Nokia brand name on mobile phones.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/dd04faf0-1452-11e3-9289-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2doyZGwQC

ibtimes says :
Quote:
Nokia will continue to own the Nokia brand, but the company will be restricted from using the brand name on its mobile devices until December 2015.
http://www.ibtimes.com/microsoft-buy-nokias-mobile-devices-services-business-72-billion-1402277
Gareth Halfacree 3rd September 2013, 11:40 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by faugusztin
Unless NY Times have wrong info, because they are saying :
Quote:
The company will continue to do business as Nokia, licensing the Nokia name to Microsoft for use on its mobile phones for 10 years.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/03/technology/microsoft-gets-nokia-units-and-leader.html?_r=0
Either the NYT has its wires crossed, or it has a better source than I - 'cos that's not what I've got in front of me 'ere direct from Nokia.
faugusztin 3rd September 2013, 11:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth Halfacree
Either the NYT has its wires crossed, or it has a better source than I - 'cos that's not what I've got in front of me 'ere direct from Nokia.

Maybe they got the info from MS ?
jrs77 3rd September 2013, 12:01 Quote
I've watched the whole PC this morning in finnish televevision and Nokia has completely sold the Lumia-trademark to Microsoft and is licensing the Nokia-trademark for the next ten years.

So the high-end smartphone-trademark Lumia is now to be called "Microsoft Lumia" and the cheap entry-level models using the Asha OS (Symbian) will still be called Nokia and Microsoft has to pay license-fees for using this trademark.

The more interesting part, noone has reported about so far is, that Microsoft and Nokia have built a huge datacenter in Finland. This will be even more interesting in month to come.
Shirty 3rd September 2013, 12:08 Quote
The Lumia 520 is pound for pound one of the greatest smartphones ever released. Only really the Nexus 4 (which is blatantly a loss leader) can compete at the price.

Microsoft done good.
jrs77 3rd September 2013, 12:14 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirty
The Lumia 520 is pound for pound one of the greatest smartphones ever released. Only really the Nexus 4 (which is blatantly a loss leader) can compete at the price.

Microsoft done good.

Doesn't help that much, as the OS sucks.

I can't repeat it often enough... Nokia should've gone with MeeGo all the way, and the Nokia N9 was proof of that.
Krazeh 3rd September 2013, 12:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
Doesn't help that much, as the OS sucks.

I can't repeat it often enough... Nokia should've gone with MeeGo all the way, and the Nokia N9 was proof of that.

In what way does the OS 'suck'?
Shirty 3rd September 2013, 12:20 Quote
In an opinionated way :)
Mikee 3rd September 2013, 12:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by j_jay4
The beginning of the end for Windows Phone IMO. We all know MS can't sell hardware (Xbox excluded). Zune HD anyone?

Yes let's exclude 78 million Xboxes sold :(

Good deal for Microsoft and with a bit more financial backing will hopefully allow Nokia to continue making quality hardware.
jrs77 3rd September 2013, 12:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazeh
In what way does the OS 'suck'?

WinPhone simply doesn't feel that good. It's somewhat sluggish and the access to alot of stuff is buried behind aweful menus.

A ton of reviews see it that way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirty
In an opinionated way :)

Yeah, an oppinion shared by most of the reviewers.
Krazeh 3rd September 2013, 12:48 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
WinPhone simply doesn't feel that good. It's somewhat sluggish and the access to alot of stuff is buried behind aweful menus.

A ton of reviews see it that way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
Yeah, an oppinion shared by most of the reviewers.

Do you have links to any of these reviews? Reviews I've seen usually talk about how fluid and fast the OS is and I've not seen complaints about stuff being hidden. Having used a Lumia 800 and now a 925 i certainly wouldn't characterise it as 'sluggish' and it's no more difficult to find options than on Android or IOS. Have you actually used a Windows phone for any length of time?
Shirty 3rd September 2013, 14:10 Quote
I'm an Android man through and through, but I've had the chance to play with a couple of Windows phones and was thoroughly impressed, to the extent that I'd be happy to make the move.
Parge 3rd September 2013, 14:25 Quote
Nice trolling JRS77 - without M$ Nokia would be about to dissappear anyway - they had literally nothing to compete with Android and iOS.

From - http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/03/nokia-lumia-800-review/
"If you'd prefer a very quick summary, then take it from us that this OS is fast, fluid and nice on the eyes. Its visual design is a boon not only for ease-of-use -- particularly for people with poor eyesight -- but also in terms of its sheer sassiness, which will be appreciated by anyone who wants to stand out from the iOS and Android crowds."

Get over it, Nokia totally failed to develop an OS that was anywhere near what their rivals were putting out and were sinking, just like Blackberry. It was either adopt this or Android, and with Elop at the helm its no big surprise a deal was done with M$. And in fact, it made sense - M$ needed a strong, well known hardware partner and Nokia needed a OS that was actually functional.
faugusztin 3rd September 2013, 14:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirty
I'm an Android man through and through, but I've had the chance to play with a couple of Windows phones and was thoroughly impressed, to the extent that I'd be happy to make the move.

I personally had to use Omnia 7 for about a month when my Galaxy Nexus order was delayed, and then later i tried to use 8S for a while as my main phone - and while both are usable for basic tasks and such, they are still so much more limited than Android, at least in my use case scenario.

I see one positive thing on this anyway - it will probably make distribution of Surface tablets much more global, as they took over the wast array of Nokia representatives, distributors and distribution channels with this trade, so maybe we could expect the next generation of MS tablets outside of North America and E5 too :D.
j_jay4 3rd September 2013, 14:56 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snips
Have you tried the 925 j_jay4? It wipes the floor with the One and S4 and still has a the best (current) smartphone camera in the market.

I've not had my hands on a 925. I thought it was just a 920 but in a different shell. I prefer the 920 shell (even thought it's very chunky). The polycarbonate shell on my Lumia 800 is rock solid and the plastic surround protects it really well.

Another reason, I don't want to get a windows 8 phone and then find that I can't get the windows phone 8.1 update. It'll be windows phone 7 all over again. So I'm trying to wait until windows phone 8.1 is released. Plenty of new phones should be released on it too.
Krazeh 3rd September 2013, 15:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by j_jay4
I've not had my hands on a 925. I thought it was just a 920 but in a different shell. I prefer the 920 shell (even thought it's very chunky). The polycarbonate shell on my Lumia 800 is rock solid and the plastic surround protects it really well.

Another reason, I don't want to get a windows 8 phone and then find that I can't get the windows phone 8.1 update. It'll be windows phone 7 all over again. So I'm trying to wait until windows phone 8.1 is released. Plenty of new phones should be released on it too.

Am very happy with my 925, feels just as solid as my 800 but not as chunky as the 920. Camera is top notch as well.

As for updates to 8.1 I'm pretty certain MS have stated it won't be the same as 7.8 to 8. All WP8 phones will be able to be updated to 8.1. Altho the GDR3 update due later this year should bring support for 1080p screens and quadcore processors so if you're not in a hurry it might be worth waiting to see what is announced over the next few months.
jrs77 3rd September 2013, 15:11 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parge
Nice trolling JRS77 - without M$ Nokia would be about to dissappear anyway - they had literally nothing to compete with Android and iOS.

From - http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/03/nokia-lumia-800-review/
"If you'd prefer a very quick summary, then take it from us that this OS is fast, fluid and nice on the eyes. Its visual design is a boon not only for ease-of-use -- particularly for people with poor eyesight -- but also in terms of its sheer sassiness, which will be appreciated by anyone who wants to stand out from the iOS and Android crowds."

Get over it, Nokia totally failed to develop an OS that was anywhere near what their rivals were putting out and were sinking, just like Blackberry. It was either adopt this or Android, and with Elop at the helm its no big surprise a deal was done with M$. And in fact, it made sense - M$ needed a strong, well known hardware partner and Nokia needed a OS that was actually functional.

Oh wow... you pulled out one professional review there to make your point. You know they get paid, do you?

I'm speaking of user-reviews found in every online-shop right below the product, and usually the WinPhone OS doesn't get that good reviews there.
Xir 3rd September 2013, 15:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaybles
I love my Lumia 800 not because of the OS but because its built like a Nokia.
Quote:
Originally Posted by j_jay4
The beginning of the end for Windows Phone IMO. We all know MS can't sell hardware (Xbox excluded).
Well they can sell it, they just simply stop wanting to do so.

remember the sidewinder branch of gaming input devices, rocksolid, top of the line, and they just....quit.
Zune, didn't sell well, but was supposedly quite good, they quit.

X-Box, well, it isn't really produced by Microsoft isn't it? (I believe the factories are ownes by Flextronics)

Nokia's were never "cool", but usually very well built, I foresee an end to that.

Just like the ericssons stopped beeing the toughest little phones around when Sony took em, and where they are now.
Shirty 3rd September 2013, 15:23 Quote
iOS: "I just want it to work with no fuss. (That and I've spent thousands in the app store)"

Android: "I just want it to work with no fuss, but I also want the option to dig under the surface and break it when I'm bored."

Windows: "For once, I am not a sheep buying a Microsoft product. Also, I just want it to work with no fuss."

QNX: "I'll defend Blackberry to the death because work have been giving me these for years. But deep down I know it's crap."

Mobile Linux: "I have hair growing out of my ears, and my personal hygiene is inferior."

Everything else: ":|"
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
Oh wow... you pulled out one professional review there to make your point. You know they get paid, do you?

I'm speaking of user-reviews found in every online-shop right below the product, and usually the WinPhone OS doesn't get that good reviews there.

Reviews of the the better Nokia handsets have been pretty much universally good regardless of the review site, and if you trust user reviews for this sort of thing you're a fool. They generally get posted by muppets within a few hours of their purchase, when they are still struggling to work out how to unlock the phone.
Nexxo 3rd September 2013, 15:26 Quote
Just switching from iOS (iPhone 4) to WP8 myself (Lumia 920). I'm pretty platform agnostic, but having had an iPhone since 2009 and having spent a lot of time on my wife's Samsung Galaxy II and now HTC 8S, I must conclude that Windows Phone is one of the slickest, most well-thought-out mobile OS's out there. True story.

Significantly, my wife who is indifferent at best towards (and loathes at worst) smartphones and held on to her Motorola Razr until it literally fell apart, absolutely loves her HTC 8S. She really groks WP8, and that is saying something.

Don't think of it as losing Nokia --think of it as preserving it. After all Google bought Motorola and there were no wails of despair about that. In fact, we now have the Moto X: one of the best, most beautifully designed recent mobiles out there, IMO. This is a good thing. Also expect much closer cooperation between MS and the parts of Nokia that weren't acquired: network services, location services.

All this angst about how Microsoft cannot sell decent hardware is bull. Microsoft has been dismal at marketing it, partly because of an ambivalence about their position as a hardware company (now resolved, it seems), and partly due to lack of experience and poor organisation (being addressed). Nokia has good experience in bringing hardware to the market so it may teach Microsoft something.

This is not going to mean unemployment for 36000 employees, by the way. They are just moving to a new company. It makes no sense to acquire a business and then lay off the people who made the business, bless you just want the name, patents and physical assets. Microsoft wants the skills as well.
blohum 3rd September 2013, 16:15 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
WinPhone simply doesn't feel that good. It's somewhat sluggish and the access to alot of stuff is buried behind aweful menus.

A ton of reviews see it that way.

I've got a bottom end Nokia 610 and it's fast and fluid on that, it can only be better on faster devices... I've also got an HTC One from work, lovely device but given the choice I'd still prefer WindowsPhone.
schmidtbag 3rd September 2013, 16:50 Quote
so... does anybody know what this means when it comes to Qt? I really hope it doesn't suddenly lose its LGPL.
Corky42 3rd September 2013, 17:03 Quote
Seems another good reason for M$ making this move is because they make less than $10 per WP, where as they stand to make over $40 under this new deal.
http://allthingsd.com/20130902/microsoft-confirms-it-gets-less-than-10-per-nokia-windows-phone-sold/
rollo 3rd September 2013, 17:06 Quote
There's 2 markets in smartphones high end which Nokia sales where never great.

Low end where the dominant nexus 7 is pretty much a pick up and buy.

Microsoft needs to target a segment and set out to compete in it. 15% by 2018 is laughable market would of changed again by then. 5 years the speed tech is developing that is near enough a lifetime.

Xbox was successful due to 2 things Xbox online and price vs competition.
faugusztin 3rd September 2013, 17:13 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by schmidtbag
so... does anybody know what this means when it comes to Qt? I really hope it doesn't suddenly lose its LGPL.

They can't. At worst KDE will fork it and no one will ever remember the commercial Qt.
Snips 3rd September 2013, 17:50 Quote
Again, there's no negatives on this deal, other than the anti-Microsoft brigade who just can't help commenting on Microsoft topics.

Go and use a handset for more than the 5 minutes if at all you've used it for. It's better thought out and runs a hell of a lot smoother and quicker than the iPhone5 or S4 which I have used both extensively.
Horizon 3rd September 2013, 17:54 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
Oh wow... you pulled out one professional review there to make your point. You know they get paid, do you?

I'm speaking of user-reviews found in every online-shop right below the product, and usually the WinPhone OS doesn't get that good reviews there.

User reviews should be taken with a grain of salt firmly attached to a 80ft(~26m) pole because every schmuck, fanboi, person with uninformed opinion will post something even though they've had not actual first hand experience with the device nor ownership. There are even user reviews for never released products on pre-order if that says anything.
schmidtbag 3rd September 2013, 18:10 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by faugusztin
They can't. At worst KDE will fork it and no one will ever remember the commercial Qt.

I don't see how that will work out. You can't just simply fork something that had it's license changed because that means the forked code is now illegal due to it basically being a copy of the now non-*GPL predecessor. Isn't that similar to how Google got screwed over by Oracle due to Java?

On the other hand, I don't think MS can just simply dump the LGPL off of Qt, so perhaps they would make a fork. Or, they might just leave it to rot, much like Oracle with Openoffice. Considering Razor-Qt, LXDE, KDE, and I think Enlightenment all depend on Qt, MS would kill off a lot of open source projects by dropping Qt support (though IMO, MS should really look into utilizing Qt - it's fantastic). But, as you said, Qt will probably still continue to live, maybe just with a different name (If this happens, I bet it'll be known as Kt)
faugusztin 3rd September 2013, 18:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by schmidtbag
I don't see how that will work out. You can't just simply fork something that had it's license changed because that means the forked code is now illegal due to it basically being a copy of the now non-*GPL predecessor. Isn't that similar to how Google got screwed over by Oracle due to Java?

Qt is fully LGPL. So anyone can fork it any day, he only limitation is that they can't call it Qt.

So while Digia could decide not to release future versions of Qt under LGPL (good luck with that), nothing stops KDE or anyone else from taking the latest LGPL codebase and call it anything but Qt.

And where did you get that info that Google got screwed over by Oracle due Java ?
Quote:
n May 2012 the jury in this case found that Google did not infringe on Oracle's patents, and the trial judge ruled that the structure of the Java APIs used by Google was not copyrightable
Quote:
Originally Posted by schmidtbag
On the other hand, I don't think MS can just simply dump the LGPL off of Qt, so perhaps they would make a fork. Or, they might just leave it to rot, much like Oracle with Openoffice. Considering Razor-Qt, LXDE, KDE, and I think Enlightenment all depend on Qt, MS would kill off a lot of open source projects by dropping Qt support (though IMO, MS should really look into utilizing Qt - it's fantastic). But, as you said, Qt will probably still continue to live, maybe just with a different name (If this happens, I bet it'll be known as Kt)

And that is what i am saying - if opensource community won't be satisfied with the development of the toolkit, they can fork with a different name.

In reality i don't think they will leave Qt to "rot", as they got many paying customers, that is why Digia took over the paying customers of Qt from Nokia.
ksyruz 3rd September 2013, 19:06 Quote
Firstly the apps that most have to have is an Office, a music, a camera, an internet, and social app. Now if you go IOS or Android you have to pay £8.99 just for the Office app, which windows phone provides for free. The reasoning to not having enough apps on the windows market is just towards the games in their app store, which has has already came to have the top guys being fully published with the most played.


This is a bit of a good and bad deal if you ask me, Microsoft needs to build a Tablet with 64-bit processing and full Windows operation, this would bring reasonong to go out and a MS tablet. Microsoft should now try and buy a share in AMD or buy them straight out. Then Microsoft and Nokia would be able to fight the big boys. For now they should thy to take over the lower end of the smartphone and phone market in the rest of the world. As Nokia seems to make the best value for specs compared to the Android boys
13eightyfour 3rd September 2013, 19:31 Quote
I switched to a low end Lumia 520 (incase I hated it) a couple of weeks ago. A couple of hours to familiarise myself with the OS and I can safely say its by far the most pleasant 'smartphone' I've used.

I'll agree with the numerous comments of people dismissing the OS just because it's MS, unless you've used a handset your points are invalid imo.

The Lumia 1020 may be the phone to tempt me back to a mainstream contract.
Corky42 3rd September 2013, 20:03 Quote
Nokia withholds its brand from Microsoft deal
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2292322/nokia-withholds-its-brand-from-microsoft-deal
Quote:
FINNISH PHONE FIRM Nokia is holding onto its company brand name, meaning that forthcoming mobile devices developed and marketed by Microsoft will not be branded as Nokia phones.
j_jay4 3rd September 2013, 20:30 Quote
What's Nokia's last hurrah going to be? Lumia 1020? Before they are rebranded as Microsoft phones. I really hope they invent a new brand because, I don't think MicroSOFT is suitable.
Corky42 3rd September 2013, 20:35 Quote
Mokia or how about Mickia, NokSoft MicroNok? :D
RedFlames 3rd September 2013, 20:47 Quote
They'll probably just be 'Microsoft Lumia' or even just 'Lumia'
azrael- 3rd September 2013, 21:42 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by schmidtbag
so... does anybody know what this means when it comes to Qt? I really hope it doesn't suddenly lose its LGPL.

Nokia no longer has any real stake in Qt. The commercial side was sold off to Digia and the open source side is now maintained by the Qt Project.
Nexxo 4th September 2013, 08:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13eightyfour
I switched to a low end Lumia 520 (incase I hated it) a couple of weeks ago. A couple of hours to familiarise myself with the OS and I can safely say its by far the most pleasant 'smartphone' I've used.

I'll agree with the numerous comments of people dismissing the OS just because it's MS, unless you've used a handset your points are invalid imo.

The Lumia 1020 may be the phone to tempt me back to a mainstream contract.

Just switched to a Lumia 920. It is absolute strawberry cheesecake.
Gareth Halfacree 4th September 2013, 10:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by schmidtbag
I don't see how that will work out. You can't just simply fork something that had it's license changed because that means the forked code is now illegal due to it basically being a copy of the now non-*GPL predecessor. Isn't that similar to how Google got screwed over by Oracle due to Java?
That's not how open source licences work. In fact, that's not how *any* licence works.

Here's an thought experiment: I release CheesecakeOS under a permissive, open-source licence. I build up a decent user-base, and a few OEMs pick it up to run their devices. After hitting version 5.0, however, I decide I'm not making enough cash from it so I close the source. If licences worked like you're suggesting, in that a change to the licence in version 5.0 affected all prior versions, the OEMs would be retrospectively breaking the licence - and I could sue.

That, naturally, is insane. Nobody would touch open source with a bargepole if that were the case. What actually happens is that the new licence affects only CheesecakeOS 5.0 onwards; all previous CheesecakeOS implementations are still GPL, and will always be GPL. Don't like the new licence? Fork CheesecakeOS 4.0 into CakecheeseOS and take over development yourself, releasing the result under the GPL. Do it right, and everyone abandons ship for your project over mine. (For a real-world example of this, see the OpenOffice.org fork LibreOffice which is now far more successful than its predecessor.)

Licences like the GPL also carry with them some terms to prevent the source being closed: if a piece of software has been previously released under the GPL, it must always be made available under the GPL. I can release CheesecakeOS 5.0 under the Halfacree Restricted You-Owe-Me-All-The-Cash Licence 1.0 Unported if I want, but any code that it has inherited from CheesecakeOS 4.0 or older will need to be released under the GPL just the same.

So, for this reason - plus, y'know, Microsoft not having bought anything to do with Qt, and Nokia not having much to do with the project itself these days - there's little to worry about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Nokia withholds its brand from Microsoft deal
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2292322/nokia-withholds-its-brand-from-microsoft-deal
Ah, so the NYT did have its wires crossed: Microsoft gets the Nokia brand for low-end devices but not smartphones, and Nokia can't use it for a mobile device for 10 years - but that's not the same as Microsoft having a 10-year licence to the name, like the NYT claimed.
rollo 4th September 2013, 10:55 Quote
Direct source from Nokia or NYT ill take the former every time NYT just makes up stuff as it pleases same as all newspapers.

Microsoft need to learn how to launch a product in more than one country before we can discuss any plans they may have. Surface rt and surface pro launch showed how far behind the times they are with there North America launch first. Surface pro took 6 months to leave North America that's just crazy.

Still wonder what made Nokia sell in the first place if they are so badly short of finance then all Microsoft has done is brought another money sink.

Microsofts plans are not exactly earth shattering 15% by 2018 if the smartphone even exists by then in the way it does today.

Also surprised Nokia effectively give up before blackberry.
Corky42 4th September 2013, 11:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rollo
Microsoft need to learn how to launch a product in more than one country before we can discuss any plans they may have. Surface rt and surface pro launch showed how far behind the times they are with there North America launch first. Surface pro took 6 months to leave North America that's just crazy.

QFT ;)

It surprises me a company such as Microsoft with its global influence, online services, IE, Skype, XBOX, and everything else that points to the online world being one marketplace/community, that they still release hardware on a regional basis.
faugusztin 4th September 2013, 11:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rollo
Also surprised Nokia effectively give up before blackberry.

Nokia didn't give up, they just changed orientation once again and decided not to play in mobile phone space anymore. Remember, they started as paper production plant :).
GeorgeStorm 4th September 2013, 11:27 Quote
I'm going to remain hopeful, big fan of Windows Mobile OS, and I've heard nothing but good things about the nokia models :)
jrs77 4th September 2013, 11:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rollo
Still wonder what made Nokia sell in the first place if they are so badly short of finance then all Microsoft has done is brought another money sink.

Microsofts plans are not exactly earth shattering 15% by 2018 if the smartphone even exists by then in the way it does today.

Also surprised Nokia effectively give up before blackberry.

Most of the former Nokia-staff (devs and engineers) founded a new company called Jolla, which will release their first device by December running SailfishOS (MeeGo with the Davik-stuff finally implemented) to run all the Android-apps.

The head-designer who now left Nokia will be joining Jolla aswell.

Basically with the money all of these former Nokia-employees got out of this deal - they were still huge shareholders of Nokia - they can fund their new company to a greater extend.
jrs77 4th September 2013, 11:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by faugusztin
Nokia didn't give up, they just changed orientation once again and decided not to play in mobile phone space anymore. Remember, they started as paper production plant :).

Not only as a paperplant. Nokia started as a manufacturer of rubber-products aswell, and they're still in the business making tyres, rubber boots, etc. The name of the company stems from the finnish city of Nokia, where the company was founded.

http://www.nokianrenkaat.fi/
http://nokianjalkineet.fi/
Corky42 4th September 2013, 11:48 Quote
They no longer manufacturer rubber-products, and the rubber stuff came 30 odd years after the paper.
http://www.nokia.com/global/about-nokia/about-us/the-nokia-story/
jrs77 4th September 2013, 12:28 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
They no longer manufacturer rubber-products, and the rubber stuff came 30 odd years after the paper.
http://www.nokia.com/global/about-nokia/about-us/the-nokia-story/

I'm living some 100km away from Nokia (finnish city) and I've got relatives that worked for Nokia there. I tend to think of having a little bit more insight into that stuff than what you can read on wikipedia.
Gareth Halfacree 4th September 2013, 12:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
I'm living some 100km away from Nokia (finnish city) and I've got relatives that worked for Nokia there. I tend to think of having a little bit more insight into that stuff than what you can read on wikipedia.
Erm... That link goes to Nokia's own website, y'know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nokia
In 1865, mining engineer Fredrik Idestam sets up his first wood pulp mill at the Tammerkoski Rapids in south-western Finland. A few years later he opens a second mill on the banks of the Nokianvirta river, which inspires him to name his company Nokia Ab in 1871. [...] OK, so it’s not exactly a revolution. But in 1898, Eduard Polón founds Finnish Rubber Works, which later becomes Nokia’s rubber business, making everything from galoshes to tyres.

On July 1, 1991, Finnish Prime Minister Harri Holkeri makes the world’s first GSM call, using Nokia equipment. And in 1992, Nokia launches its first digital handheld GSM phone, the Nokia 1011. That same year, new Nokia President and CEO Jorma Ollila makes a crucial strategic decision: to focus exclusively on manufacturing mobile phones and telecommunications systems. Nokia’s rubber, cable and consumer electronics divisions are gradually sold off.

I had a Nokia TV, once. It worked great for years, but eventually went fizzzzzZZZZZ-POP and released the magic smoke.
Nexxo 4th September 2013, 12:41 Quote
I remember Samsung when it was still crap. Cheap and original, but crap.

But I digress. The reason why Microsoft seems to struggle to launch products worldwide even though it has the infrastructure through Xbox etc. is because none of its divisions play nicely together. Hopefully the reorganisation will change that.
jrs77 4th September 2013, 13:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth Halfacree
Erm... That link goes to Nokia's own website, y'know.


I had a Nokia TV, once. It worked great for years, but eventually went fizzzzzZZZZZ-POP and released the magic smoke.

The question is, what do you call Nokia? Nokias mobile segment or the electronics is not what makes Nokia, but the rubber-manufacturing. The paper-manufacturing wasn't done in Nokia either, but in Tampere.

Nokia is the name of a city in Finland, and every finn older than teenagers relates the company to the city, when the company started to manufacture rubber-products there.
Corky42 4th September 2013, 13:51 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
The question is, what do you call Nokia? Nokias mobile segment or the electronics is not what makes Nokia, but the rubber-manufacturing. The paper-manufacturing wasn't done in Nokia either, but in Tampere.

Nokia is the name of a city in Finland, and every finn older than teenagers relates the company to the city, when the company started to manufacture rubber-products there.

The rubber-manufacturing company is called Nokian, locally it may be known as something else but personally i would refer to a company as its listed on the NASDAQ, or the company's own website.
Gareth Halfacree 4th September 2013, 14:52 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
The question is, what do you call Nokia? Nokias mobile segment or the electronics is not what makes Nokia, but the rubber-manufacturing. The paper-manufacturing wasn't done in Nokia either, but in Tampere. Nokia is the name of a city in Finland, and every finn older than teenagers relates the company to the city, when the company started to manufacture rubber-products there.
Hey, don't argue with me: argue with Nokia. I'm sure you know much more about the company's origins than the company itself.
Krazeh 4th September 2013, 18:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth Halfacree
Ah, so the NYT did have its wires crossed: Microsoft gets the Nokia brand for low-end devices but not smartphones, and Nokia can't use it for a mobile device for 10 years - but that's not the same as Microsoft having a 10-year licence to the name, like the NYT claimed.

According to an interview on Nokia Conversations with Nokia marketing chief, Tuula Rytilä, MS will be purchasing the license to use the Nokia brand on mobile phones for ten years and outright buying the 'Lumia' and 'Asha' brands.
Gareth Halfacree 4th September 2013, 20:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazeh
According to an interview on Nokia Conversations with Nokia marketing chief, Tuula Rytilä, MS will be purchasing the license to use the Nokia brand on mobile phones for ten years and outright buying the 'Lumia' and 'Asha' brands.
There's a handy bit of weasel-wording in that interview. "Microsoft will purchase the license to use the Nokia brand on mobile phones for ten years. It will also buy the ‘Lumia’ and ‘Asha’ brands. On smartphones, we’ll be seeking to create a unified brand across Lumia and Windows. But we understand that the Asha and feature phone range will carry on the ‘Nokia’ branding." (My emphasis.)

What isn't mentioned there, but has already been confirmed, is that Lumia and other smartphone ranges won't carry on the Nokia branding.
impar 24th September 2013, 22:48 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Nokia Admits Giving Misleading Information About Elop's Compensation

Nokia’s board of directors seems caught in a tragicomedy of epic proportions. The latest twist is Finland’s largest newspaper claiming that Nokia made a false statement about CEO’s bonus package last Friday. Pressed by Finnish and international media last week, chairman Siilasmaa had claimed then that the bonus structure of Stephen Elop’s contract in 2010 was “essentially the same” as the one the previous CEO had received. But the largest daily of the country, “Helsingin Sanomat”, decided to dig into SEC filings to investigate the matter. By early Tuesday morning, the newspaper had uncovered evidence that Nokia’s board had made fundamental changes in Elop’s contract compared to his predecessors.
...
This adjustment meant that unlike previous CEOs, Elop was facing an instant, massive windfall should the following sequence happen to take place:

Nokia’s share price drops steeply as the company drifts close to cash flow crisis under Elop.
Elop sells the company’s handset unit to Microsoft MSFT -1.04% under pressure to raise cash
The share price rebounds sharply, though remains far below where it was when Elop joined the company.

Should this unlikely chain of events ever occur, Elop would be entitled to an accelerated, $25M payoff.
...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/terokuittinen/2013/09/24/nokia-admits-giving-misleading-information-about-elops-compensation/
Nexxo 24th September 2013, 23:57 Quote
So Nokia created a powerful incentive for Elop to sell Nokia at a knock-down price to Microsoft? I'm sorry, I thought he was supposed to be Microsoft's Trojan horse?
impar 25th September 2013, 10:19 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
I'm sorry, ...
Why are you sorry?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
... I thought he was supposed to be Microsoft's Trojan horse?
To what entity did Elop sold Nokia to?
Nexxo 25th September 2013, 10:25 Quote
And who apparently provided the incentive to do so?
impar 25th September 2013, 10:29 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
And who apparently provided the incentive to do so?
To sell to Microsoft? No one.
Krazeh 25th September 2013, 10:59 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by impar
Greetings!

To sell to Microsoft? No one.

So you don't think the contract provided by Nokia gives any incentive to sell?
impar 25th September 2013, 11:39 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazeh
So you don't think the contract provided by Nokia gives any incentive to sell?
It provides incentives to the CEO to sell the devices division. It doesnt specify to be to Microsoft. That is all Elops decision (pending shareholders approvals).

Speaking of Elop, are you familiar with the term "Elops Effect" after his "burning platform" memo?
This was what was supposed to happen:
http://i.imgur.com/teZQP3o.jpg
It ended like this:
http://i.imgur.com/RNo8ePi.jpg

Full analysis here:
http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/brands/2012/10/the-there-pillars-of-nokia-strategy-have-all-failed-why-nokia-must-fire-ceo-elop-now.html

The term "trojan horse" is adequate to define Elop as a CEO.
Corky42 25th September 2013, 12:13 Quote
I think what Nexxo is getting at is that the it was the boards decision to sell, they even incentivised there CEO to shape the company into something that could be sold.

The problem is they couldn't sell when the stock price was high as the shareholders would have blocked it, as stupid as it sounds they had to devalue there own stock to a point that the shareholders would agree to the sale.
Nexxo 28th September 2013, 12:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by impar
Greetings!

It provides incentives to the CEO to sell the devices division. It doesnt specify to be to Microsoft. That is all Elops decision (pending shareholders approvals).

Speaking of Elop, are you familiar with the term "Elops Effect" after his "burning platform" memo?
This was what was supposed to happen:
http://i.imgur.com/teZQP3o.jpg
It ended like this:
http://i.imgur.com/RNo8ePi.jpg

Full analysis here:
http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/brands/2012/10/the-there-pillars-of-nokia-strategy-have-all-failed-why-nokia-must-fire-ceo-elop-now.html

The term "trojan horse" is adequate to define Elop as a CEO.

Nice graphs. Now read this and be enlightened.

Elop did not abandon Symbian; Symbian was collapsing under his feet, mainly through the efforts of Nokia's previous CEO Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo. Nokia was giving Symbian and itself a bad reputation with the shoddy implementation of its Symbian phones; this in the context of strong iPhone and Android competitors. Sure, Slop could have milked Symbian for all its worth while shifting to Windows Phone; extract maximum value from it before dropping it altogether. But hat would mean continuing to flood the market with crappy, crappy phones with the Nokia brand emblazoned on it. With such a reputation firmly established, people would not give its Windows Phone offerings a second glance.

Sorry, but Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo destroyed Symbian, not Elop. It was he who ruined a decent platform so badly that it not only killed its future, but damaged Nokia's brand. Elop had to dissociate from it as soon as possible.
impar 28th September 2013, 12:51 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Nice graphs. Now read this and be enlightened.
Read it when the article was published.
Nexxo 28th September 2013, 13:00 Quote
Did you understand it? :p
impar 28th September 2013, 13:11 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Sorry, but Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo destroyed Symbian, not Elop. It was he who ruined a decent platform so badly that it not only killed its future, but damaged Nokia's brand.
"Burning platform" memo, having Nokia miss the Android boat and jump head first into WP werent Elops decisions?
faugusztin 28th September 2013, 13:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by impar
"Burning platform" memo, having Nokia miss the Android boat and jump head first into WP werent Elops decisions?

At that moment, Nokia was already deep in the troubles - that is what Nexxo says. Let's imagine someone gets the CEO spot of Blackberry now - by your logic it will be the new CEOs fault that Blackberry has big issues.
impar 28th September 2013, 16:12 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by faugusztin
At that moment, Nokia was already deep in the troubles - that is what Nexxo says. Let's imagine someone gets the CEO spot of Blackberry now - by your logic it will be the new CEOs fault that Blackberry has big issues.
Blackberry is in far worse shape Nokia was.
Nexxo 28th September 2013, 18:58 Quote
That is irrelevant to the point that faugusztin and I are making: is the new CEO responsible for the actions of the old one?

And "missing the Android boat"? That boat is occupied by Samsung. HTC, Sony et al. are barely clinging to a life raft. Elop had no desire to join them.
impar 28th September 2013, 20:51 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
And "missing the Android boat"? That boat is occupied by Samsung. HTC, Sony et al. are barely clinging to a life raft. Elop had no desire to join them.
Totally missed the Android boat. Samsung wouldnt be the mobile monster it is if Nokia had chosen to go Android.
Nexxo 28th September 2013, 21:15 Quote
I think you'll need to underpin that opinion with some foundation, sir, especially considering Sony, HTC, LG, Huwaei, Lenovo and ZTE are not even making a dent in Samsung's dominance. And it's not as if they're selling shoddy mobiles (seriously, have you seen the Huwaei Ascend P6?).
Shirty 28th September 2013, 22:45 Quote
I have just started using an HTC One. I concur with this point ;)

It's better than the S4 overall, but will be a commercial flop by comparison. Samsung are the new Apple tbh.
freshsandwiches 30th September 2013, 01:43 Quote
Just purchased a Nokia 920 for £200 on Tesco Direct sim free with a £15 per month sim all you can eat from three.

I think I've made a sensible purchase, please reassure me.
Nexxo 30th September 2013, 09:16 Quote
Since I paid £200,-- for a mint-condition Lumia 920 on eBay, I think you did pretty well. £15,-- for all-you-can-eat data sounds good too. May look into that myself.

The mobile itself is great. 4G is fast but sucks battery. Don't be alarmed if the unit gets slightly warm at the top while playing video or using 4G. GUI is snappy and intuitive, and screen is great.

Bluetooth can be a bit picky, and it needs a USB charger that can put out 1 Amp (most good quality chargers do).

Get to know the interface --there are a lot of things it can do that people don't realise. Live tiles are powerful. Also get to know the apps --there are a lot of useful, beautiful apps that enhance its functionality.
Thaifood 30th September 2013, 09:35 Quote
I would have considered the win phone route if I haven't spent all that money on the iphone apps :-(
Jaybles 30th September 2013, 09:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thaifood
I would have considered the win phone route if I haven't spent all that money on the iphone apps :-(

If you are the type to spend lots of money on apps then WP may not be for you. I love my WP but I'm not an appy person. I have maybe 4? that I use regularly. The app market is still lacking behind the competition.
impar 30th September 2013, 11:20 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
I think you'll need to underpin that opinion with some foundation, sir, ...
Really?!:(
Lets see what was the marketshare in 2007-2008 (Android released in 4Q2008):
http://i.imgur.com/xJrmhCs.jpg
http://www.webpronews.com/global-smartphone-sales-up-in-2008-2009-03
Samsung doesnt even register in the full year, but:
Quote:
As a proportion of all mobile device sales, smartphones remained stable at 12 percent in the fourth quarter of 2008, from 11 percent in the fourth quarter of 2007. Samsung made it into the top five vendors ranking for the first time, replacing Sharp.
Samsung starts its climb.

Then Android came and dominated:
http://i.imgur.com/dos08kF.png
http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/02/idc-android-market-share-reached-75-worldwide-in-q3-2012/
Where was Nokia? Releasing "burned-platforms Symbians" or WP devices.

Samsung was also releasing WP devices, how did they behaved competing on the same OS?
http://i.imgur.com/PVPEFoq.png
http://blog.adduplex.com/2013/09/adduplex-windows-phone-statistics.html#more
Too bad WP marketshare is so small compared to Android.

The refusal by Nokia to adopt Android opened the doors for Samsung-Android dominance on the smartphone arena.
faugusztin 30th September 2013, 11:34 Quote
impar: It was the refusal of Nokia to do anything non-Symbian. The issue with those "Smartphone sales in 2008" is the definition of smartphone back then. You know what was considered smartphone ? Symbian S60. Things like Nokia 6120 clasic : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_6120_Classic . It was "Smartphone", not smartphone. Or as said before - lies, damned lies and statistics.
impar 30th September 2013, 11:42 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by faugusztin
impar: It was the refusal of Nokia to do anything non-Symbian.
Look at the alternatives. Besides Android, to what OS could Nokia hang to that could compete with Androids market voracity?
Quote:
Originally Posted by faugusztin
The issue with those "Smartphone sales in 2008" is the definition of smartphone back then.
That definition is always changing. The same for "feature phones" (that one is even harder to define).
faugusztin 30th September 2013, 11:55 Quote
In 2008 smartphones were already similar to current definition, that is most of the front is occupied by the screen itself - iPhone, HTC Touch Diamond, Touch HD, Touch Pro. Except few exceptions, Nokia "smartphones" weren't smartphones by design, and only partially by OS. Nokia smartphones for general public (not counting the highend non-Symbian Nokia smartphones like N810/N900) started in 2009, with 5800 XtremeMusic.
impar 30th September 2013, 12:58 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by faugusztin
In 2008 smartphones were already similar to current definition, that is most of the front is occupied by the screen itself ...
Never heard that definition for smartphones before.
Asha phones then are smartphones?
The old Samsungs WP6.5 with qwerty werent?
Nexxo 30th September 2013, 19:45 Quote
I think you are getting a bit creative with the truth. You are arguing:

"If Nokia had entered the Android market in 2008, Samsung would not have got the upper hand."

Sure, Samsung was pitted against HTC, Sony and LG, all seasoned manufacturers, and it wiped the floor with them. But somehow Nokia would have fared differently?

"Nokia went up against Samsung with Windows Phone, and won that market; proof it could have done the same in the Android market."

Yeah, right. Samsung released a few lacklustre Windows Phone models. HTC released two decent offerings, but still only two. Nokia released a whole slew of them and hence took dominance in a market where there was little competition.

Compare that to Samsung and HTC's Android efforts, which are a large range of substantial devices. Not the same market, kiddo.
impar 30th September 2013, 23:28 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Sure, Samsung was pitted against HTC, Sony and LG, all seasoned manufacturers, and it wiped the floor with them. But somehow Nokia would have fared differently?
Nokia was the gorilla in a room full of chimps.
Nexxo 30th September 2013, 23:57 Quote
Again, you'll have to underpin that opinion with some evidence.
impar 1st October 2013, 00:02 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Again, you'll have to underpin that opinion with some evidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by impar
Lets see what was the marketshare in 2007-2008 (Android released in 4Q2008):
http://i.imgur.com/xJrmhCs.jpg
http://www.webpronews.com/global-smartphone-sales-up-in-2008-2009-03
Samsung doesnt even register in the full year,
...
Nexxo 1st October 2013, 08:31 Quote
Sorry, but that table means nothing at all. In 2007 Microsoft owned 42% of the Smartphone market. BlackBerry reached its peak of 22% market share in 2009. Both were 'gorillas' in the smartphone market. Where are they now?

Meanwhile Apple had 0% market share before 2007, and no experience or track record in smartphones whatsoever; definitely a non-player, a weed, a tiny speck on the radar. And where is it now?
impar 1st October 2013, 11:56 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Sorry, but that table means nothing at all. In 2007 Microsoft owned 42% of the Smartphone market. BlackBerry reached its peak of 22% market share in 2009. Both were 'gorillas' in the smartphone market. Where are they now?
They were crushed by iOS and Android.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Meanwhile Apple had 0% market share before 2007, and no experience or track record in smartphones whatsoever; definitely a non-player, a weed, a tiny speck on the radar. And where is it now?
Apple now commands approximately 1/6 of the smartphone market, and shrinking to Android pressure:
http://i.imgur.com/3ebTYYh.png
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/04/26/samsung_smartphone_sales_rise_to_double_apple_s_market_share.html
Nexxo 1st October 2013, 18:47 Quote
So what does that tell you about predicting future success in the smartphone market by current market share?
impar 1st October 2013, 22:46 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
So what does that tell you about predicting future success in the smartphone market by current market share?
So far that Android is still gaining marketshare and Nokia made the mistake of not adopting Android.
Krazeh 1st October 2013, 23:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by impar
Greetings!

So far that Android is still gaining marketshare and Nokia made the mistake of not adopting Android.

Android having the majority share of the market doesn't mean that Nokia would have ended up with a sizeable share. Nothing you've presented demonstrates that Nokia would not have simply ended up as a minor player while Samsung continued their dominance.
Nexxo 1st October 2013, 23:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by impar
So far that Android is still gaining marketshare and Nokia made the mistake of not adopting Android.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazeh
Android having the majority share of the market doesn't mean that Nokia would have ended up with a sizeable share. Nothing you've presented demonstrates that Nokia would not have simply ended up as a minor player while Samsung continued their dominance.

Exactly. Samsung is gaining the Android market share. There is no reason to assume Nokia would have done so instead, when six other very capable players couldn't.
freshsandwiches 2nd October 2013, 00:23 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo

Get to know the interface --there are a lot of things it can do that people don't realise. Live tiles are powerful. Also get to know the apps --there are a lot of useful, beautiful apps that enhance its functionality.

Took delivery of it today. I have to say I'm impressed so far. All my accounts have integrated themselves nicely and the device works well.

It will do what I need it to do and I'm pleased I have something a little different to the crowd.

My brief play around with the Nokia music app was fun. It seemed to work really well.
Nexxo 2nd October 2013, 00:35 Quote
Some cool tricks:
- OneNote allows you to pin a "new note" tile to the home screen. Tap it and it automatically opens into a new note for you. Tapping on the regular OneNote tile then takes you to the previously opened note.
- Try the My Commute tile with Nokia Here Drive. At the appropriate time it flashes up estimated travel time of your commute, if it senses you are at the relevant commute location. It dynamically adapts to traffic conditions.
- You can pin anyone to the home screen in their own tile. Their latest communication to you (or on social networks) flashes up there. Tapping the tile shows the entire history of communications between you and them, all their contact details, shared photos etc.
- Download Phone search for a universal phone search.
- Download Arthur Semenov's Battery Meter. Besides battery info, you can pin Bluetooth, WiFi, GPS and Airplane mode right on the home screen.
impar 2nd October 2013, 10:34 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazeh
Android having the majority share of the market doesn't mean that Nokia would have ended up with a sizeable share. Nothing you've presented demonstrates that Nokia would not have simply ended up as a minor player while Samsung continued their dominance.
They competed before Android, Nokia took the lead. They also competed on the minor market of WP, Nokia took the lead.
Had Nokia took the Android road, Android market would be different than it is now.
Krazeh 2nd October 2013, 10:51 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by impar
Greetings!

They competed before Android, Nokia took the lead. They also competed on the minor market of WP, Nokia took the lead.
Had Nokia took the Android road, Android market would be different than it is now.

You're still not providing any basis for this claim. The fact that Nokia may have had a majority share of the mobile phone market in the past or has managed to obtain a majority share of the WP market doesn't demonstrate they would have been able to outsell Samsung, or even come close to matching them, if they had gone with Android. What makes you think people would have bought a Nokia handset instead of a Samsung if they were given the choice?
impar 2nd October 2013, 11:26 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazeh
What makes you think people would have bought a Nokia handset instead of a Samsung if they were given the choice?
The brand itself, Nokia.
It had a great reputation and a chain of stores. No other manufacturer has its retail\tech support presence. People liked that.
I have no doubt if Nokia had chosen to go Android, Nokia would be at a much better place than it is now.
The push to WP was to differentiate Nokia from Android and iOS, to create a third force. It has created that third force, but its just too small to battle the other two OSes (RIM\Blackberry is dead, they would probably have benefitted to go Android too).
Nexxo 2nd October 2013, 17:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by impar
They competed before Android, Nokia took the lead. They also competed on the minor market of WP, Nokia took the lead. Had Nokia took the Android road, Android market would be different than it is now.

Different markets, remember?

Blackberry took the lead in Enterprise mobile communcations. Windows Mobile 6 took 42% of the mobile market. Motorola did well. Nokia took the lead--

--along came iPhone. Total n00b in the mobile phone industry, totally new platform. Wipes out the competition, including BlackBerry, including Windows Mobile, including Motorola and Nokia.

Along comes Android. Everybody can use it; it's free (sort of)! Along comes Samsung. Again, new in the mobile market, barely a reputation compared to, say, Sony and Motorola who were there right from the 90's onward, making solid mobiles. Samsung wipes out the competition.

You just cannot go on past reputation in a rapidly evolving market. it means nothing.
impar 2nd October 2013, 22:45 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
You just cannot go on past reputation in a rapidly evolving market. it means nothing.
I didnt noticed any failure at Nokias development, release and support of WP devices. They still have the know how. They just bet on a bad horse.
Nexxo 2nd October 2013, 23:03 Quote
You keep repeating yourself, yet you keep failing to bring proof or logic to underpin your view. So let's move on, shall we?
impar 3rd October 2013, 11:01 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
You keep repeating yourself, yet you keep failing to bring proof or logic to underpin your view.
Or someone keeps failing to understand...
Krazeh 3rd October 2013, 11:03 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by impar
Greetings!

Or someone keeps failing to understand...

I think that may be you to be honest...
impar 3rd October 2013, 11:56 Quote
Greetings!

Ok, so Nokia behaved extremely well before smartphones came, continued behaving well with primitive smartphones, loses lots of ground to iOS and Android devices, competes and excels in the minor smartphone market of WP, but somehow, had Nokia gone the Android route, it would behave extremely bad?
To believe that is of a level of intellectual dishonesty I didnt expected here.
Nexxo 3rd October 2013, 15:59 Quote
I think that you are projecting.

You keep looking at this as Nokia in isolation, not Nokia in the context of competitors in particular markets, at a particular time.

We have already demonstrated that past performance is not a predictor of future performance for both manufacturers and operating systems. Motorola, BlackBerry and Windows Mobile all did pretty well before the iPhone came along --made by Apple which had zero market share and track record in the mobile phone market, running an operating system that had also had zero market share or track record.

We have also demonstrated that not all markets are equal. There are a number of really good competitors in the Android market, while there are only three in the Windows Phone market. Moreover, the contributions by Samsung and HTC to the Windows Phone market are very modest in comparison to the range and quality of models that they produce for the Android market. Nokia simply has less compelling competition in the Windows Phone market --it has no Samsung Galaxy 3/4 to go up against, no HTC One, no Huwaei Ascend 6 for instance.

Meanwhile, really good mobiles like the HTC One and Huwaei Ascend 6 are struggling to gain market share against Samsung's Galaxy range.

Conclusion:
- Previous track record and market share means nothing in a rapidly evolving market.
- Competition in the Android market is fierce, with many good competitors releasing a wide range of products, and all struggling against Samsung.
- Competition in the Windows Phone market is mild, with two competitors releasing only three medium-spec models in total (Samsung Ativ S; HTC 8S, HTC 8X now superceded by HTC 8XT, while Nokia is releasing a whole range from basic to high spec.

Your whole argument hinges on the idea that Nokia could gain market share where HTC, Huwaei, Motorola, Sony and LG could not because in the past it made pretty decent mobiles. Well, so did Motorola, Sony and BlackBerry. The past is another country, kiddo.
impar 7th October 2013, 22:36 Quote
Greetings!

Related:
Quote:
Finland and Nokia: An affair to remember
The company that built a country has lost its aura and relinquished the controls.
...
For a start, Nokia is older than Finland. Much older. It was founded in 1865 while Finland—after over 700 years of Swedish rule and 109 years of Russian rule—only attained its independence in 1918. The Nokia name appeared in 1871 when founder Fredrik Idestam renamed it after a small nearby town, and over the next hundred years it grew by continually switching industries. It moved from paper to rubber to robotics to chemicals and eventually to electronics and telecommunications in the 1970s. Yet where company and country bonded was with a mutual crisis.
...
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/finland-and-nokia-an-affair-to-remember/
impar 31st October 2013, 11:36 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Sales of Nokia Smartphones Maintain Growth, But Demand Still Low .
Life-to-Date Sales of Nokia Lumia Barely Beats One Quarter of Apple iPhone Shipments

http://i.imgur.com/KsQQghW.png

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile/display/20131029225007_Sales_of_Nokia_Smartphones_Maintain_Grow_But_Demand_Still_Low.html
impar 11th December 2013, 13:56 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Nokia moves ahead with plans for a low-end Android handset
With a move away from Asha, Nokia's last platform may be put to rest.

http://i.imgur.com/NExXQlM.jpg

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/12/nokia-moves-ahead-with-plans-for-a-low-end-android-handset/
Harlequin 11th December 2013, 14:15 Quote
the missus has just upgraded her galaxy ace to a Lumia 520 , she really likes it (and yes it syncs to her surface RT and xbox )
impar 8th January 2014, 23:43 Quote
impar 11th February 2014, 11:44 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
WSJ: Nokia X Android phone to be unveiled this month at MWC
...
The Nokia X will use a heavily modified version of Google’s Android operating system. This won’t be the same OS you find on Samsung Galaxys or Nexus tablets; rather, this will be a forked version of the AOSP, with little ties to the search engine giant. Just like Amazon did with its Kindle tablets, the version of Android used by Nokia’s X phone will feature a very different UI and have its own separate App Store, without promoting any of Google’s services.
...
http://www.neowin.net/news/wsj-nokia-x-android-phone-to-be-unveiled-this-month-at-mwc
Android without access to Store...
Nexxo 12th February 2014, 09:14 Quote
Yeah, because that's how it works.

Android consists of two parts. There's the 'open' OS part, and there's the Google APIs and services that hook into it. You can fork the OS part to create your own flavour of Android (as people have been arguing Microsoft should do, instead of persisting with WP8), but you cannot tap into the accompanying services --they belong to Google. Moreover, as time has gone by Google has been stripping more and more functions and APIs out of the open OS bit and incorporating them into the Google specific bit. Android ain't that open anymore.

So Nokia may fork its own version of Android, and nice it looks too, but it won't have access to Google Play, Google Search, Google Now, most Google apps, Google Maps, Google Docs... Let's see how that flies.
Cthippo 12th February 2014, 09:34 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
So Nokia may fork its own version of Android, and nice it looks too, but it won't have access to Google Play, Google Search, Google Now, most Google apps, Google Maps, Google Docs... Let's see how that flies.

I've got an off brand tablet that won't work with Google Play, and the predictive search when entering addresses into the browser is broken because of it. on the other hand, Google maps and the separate Google Earth application work to one extent or another. The Standard android mapping app works fine, but GE won't work with the GPS input.

Appearently it's not quite an all or nothing approach from Google to what will and will not work without full android integration.
impar 12th February 2014, 12:40 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
So Nokia may fork its own version of Android, and nice it looks too, but it won't have access to Google Play, Google Search, Google Now, most Google apps, Google Maps, Google Docs... Let's see how that flies.
The lack of access to Google Play and all the non-Google apps is what disappoints in this "Normandy" device.
You can use Android and stay clear of Google apps. I use Android and dont use Gmail, Drive, Maps, Chrome, Google+, Hangouts or any of the Google apps, except for YouTube.
Normandy app store will be very poor by Android standart.
Krazeh 12th February 2014, 12:49 Quote
If this device does get released (following the finalisation of MS's acquisition of Nokia's hardware/phone division) then it will be intended for developing markets. It's not intended as a competitor to high end android mobiles and probably won't be seen in most markets.
impar 12th February 2014, 13:10 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazeh
If this device does get released (following the finalisation of MS's acquisition of Nokia's hardware/phone division) then it will be intended for developing markets.
I am seeing it be referred as an Asha replacement.
Nexxo 12th February 2014, 13:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cthippo
I've got an off brand tablet that won't work with Google Play, and the predictive search when entering addresses into the browser is broken because of it. on the other hand, Google maps and the separate Google Earth application work to one extent or another. The Standard android mapping app works fine, but GE won't work with the GPS input.

Appearently it's not quite an all or nothing approach from Google to what will and will not work without full android integration.

It's going to be. With each new version of Android more of its functionality is ported to Google-proprietary APIs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by impar
The lack of access to Google Play and all the non-Google apps is what disappoints in this "Normandy" device.
You can use Android and stay clear of Google apps. I use Android and dont use Gmail, Drive, Maps, Chrome, Google+, Hangouts or any of the Google apps, except for YouTube.
Normandy app store will be very poor by Android standart.

Nokia would have been better off to just embrace Android fully and slap their own skin on top, as HTC and Samsung have always done.
impar 13th February 2014, 01:22 Quote
SchizoFrog 13th February 2014, 02:50 Quote
Personally I am waiting for the release of WP8.1 and the launch of the new upcoming app store to make my final decision on which direction to take. I like WP and want it to take off but MS really need to deliver what they have been promising for far too long now. Should MS fail to deliver a true competitor to Android then I doubt I'll wait any further and will go with Android via a high end Samsung or maybe a Sony Xperia.
impar 24th February 2014, 11:27 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Nokia officially announces family of Nokia X Android smartphones [Update]

http://www.neowin.net/news/nokia-officially-announces-android-based-nokia-x-and-nokia-x-plus-smartphones
Quote:
This is Nokia X: Android and Windows Phone collide

http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/24/5440498/nokia-x-android-phone-hands-on
Quote:
Nokia's Normandy Uses Android as Windows Phone "Training Wheels"
...
Google Inc.'s (GOOG) core services -- Gmail, Google Maps, and the Google Play store -- would be stripped out of Android, preventing Google from receiving a cut of the profit.
...
http://www.dailytech.com/Nokias+Normandy+Uses+Android+as+Windows+Phone+Training+Wheels/article34358.htm
impar 11th March 2014, 23:24 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Microsoft's faced with opposition in Korea over Nokia acquisition

What American regulators do, if anything, is still up in the air. But with so many industry leaders raising concerns over the issue, they may be forced to act - despite Microsoft's best intentions.

http://www.neowin.net/news/microsofts-faced-with-opposition-in-korea-over-nokia-acquisition
impar 16th May 2014, 12:31 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Microsoft made a secret book for Nokia employees before its takeover
128 pages of illustrative history
...
http://i.imgur.com/TyAJRjt.jpg
...
http://www.theverge.com/2014/5/15/5719840/microsoft-nokia-one-book-photo-essay
impar 4th November 2014, 11:27 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Rumour: Nokia to re-enter smartphone market with Android

BGR also reveals that Nokia chief financial officer Timo Ihamuotila talked about the power of the Nokia brand in a recent conference call:
Quote:
“We will, of course, carefully assess what would be the best way for us to maximize the value of the Nokia brand, also taking into account that we’re in the lock-up period still in the Microsoft transaction regarding our possibility to use the brand and we have recognized that Nokia brand is the most valuable from recognition perspective in the area of mobile phones and mobile devices."

Moving forward, it is quite possible that we will see an Android phone made by Nokia in the future once they are free to sell phones in 2016. It will be very interesting to see what device the iconic N9 team produces in the future and what impact will it have on Microsoft's efforts, but file this under probable rumors for the time being.

http://www.neowin.net/news/rumour-nokia-to-re-enter-smartphone-market-with-android
impar 15th November 2014, 11:10 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Nokia Explores Two Paths Back to the Smartphone Market

Nokia could license its brand to OEMs in Asia and elsewhere or it could sell smartphones manufactured by ODMs

http://www.dailytech.com/Nokia+Explores+Two+Paths+Back+to+the+Smartphone+Market/article36891.htm
impar 18th November 2014, 11:51 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Nokia launches N1 Android Tablet running Lollipop

In a rather surprising move, Nokia has launched a new Android tablet. Called the Nokia N1,
the device is 7.9-inch tablet running Android 5.0 Lollipop and Nokia Z Launcher on top.

http://i.imgur.com/2nREzH3.jpg

Here are the complete specs of the device:

7.9-inch, 2048x1536 (4:3) IPS LCD with Gorilla Glass 3 and fully laminated zero air gap display
64-bit 2.3GHz Intel Atom Z3580 processor, PowerVR G6430 GPU with 2GB RAM
32GB built-in memory (non-expandable)
8 megapixel rear camera, 5 megapixel front camera
Dual channel 802.11a/b/g/n/ac Wi-Fi with MIMO, Bluetooth 4.0
Micro-USB 2.0 with a Type-C reversible connector
Stereo speakers
5300mAh battery
Unibody aluminum design; available in Natural Aluminum or Lava Gray colors

http://www.gsmarena.com/nokia_launches_n1_android_tablet_running_lollipop-news-10236.php

http://n1.nokia.com/
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums