Finnish finance minister claims Microsoft has “betrayed” Finland
As roughly 1,000 of the soon-to-be discharged workers are Finnish citizens, it comes to no surprise that Microsoft's layoff plans have spurred a great deal of negative reactions in Finland. The country's finance minister, Antti Rinne, addressed Microsoft and made no bones about the dismissal – he openly stated that the giant “has betrayed” Finland. The minister reveals that Redmond has been initially very much committed to Finland and Nokia's know-how, but unfortunately, it did not remain bound to some of its more important vows. From his words we can deduce that Microsoft has promised not to dismiss any workers so soon after it acquired Nokia, but certain aspects, such as the stalling market share of Windows Phone, have forced Redmond to take these extreme measures.
Antti Rinne also stated that he has personally undertook the control on Microsoft's promised data center, which are to be created across Finland. “They were promised,” he says.
Apart from laying off 18,000 employees, Microsoft also plans to revamp some of its Android-powered devices from the Nokia X family to Windows Phone-running ones. Even more, rumor has it that its curious McLaren flagship, which is said to come with unique gesture-based input, has also been suspended for the time being.
source: Kauppalehti (translated) via WPCentral
1. bucky (Posts: 1390; Member since: 30 Sep 2009)
In the end it falls under "it's just business" unfortunately. It's still ruthless to take Nokia and then strip it it down to a shell of its former self.
13. Johnnokia (Posts: 512; Member since: 27 May 2012)
Microsoft betrayed all Nokia's fans not only you. However, shame on you Finnishs. You did not support Nokia when they needed that. You sold your glory, legacy, and legend free to those Redmond's felons
35. vasra (Posts: 3; Member since: 27 Feb 2014)
Actually, the multi-national owners of Nokia (it's a publicly traded company, listed at NYSE) sold it to Microsoft.
The board and the operational leaders just helped on the deal.
But yes, sad still.
14. NexusX (Posts: 114; Member since: 16 May 2013)
Nokia's got 13000 employees making a few flagships every year, and you wonder why they were going under?
16. Ashoaib (Posts: 1924; Member since: 15 Nov 2013)
imagine if nokia was making android phones and might had adopted android on time... I bet if nokia might not be no.2, atleast it might be no.3 in the world after samsung and apple
31. NokiaFTW (Posts: 2000; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)
Tell me who's number 3 after Samsung and Apple today. LG? Are they doing any good? NO. So stop it with this BS. Nokia were dead when they didn't make any progress with their plans in 2010. Their first WP, the Lumia 800, was a year late. If they had released that in 2010, when WP was new and Nokia still had popularity, they could have been in a different place today. If anything, MS kept Nokia afloat for another 2 years by pumping in millions.
34. alterecho (Posts: 1080; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)
"MS kept Nokia afloat for another 2 years by pumping in millions."
No... They put blinkers on Nokia, so that it doesn't deviate from the road which leads to Microsoft.
51. NokiaFTW (Posts: 2000; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)
As I mentioned, the road to an eventual acquisition by some company started in 2010, with Nokia not paying much attention to smartphones and taking Android for granted whilst losing marketshare and money. The question was who would acquire them, and that was MS in the end. Simple.
57. Liveitup (Posts: 1193; Member since: 07 Jan 2014)
Where have you been Alterchero, back trolling MS articles I see. Android fans are so insecure in their OS of choice they have no choice but to troll WP articles.
66. Johnnokia (Posts: 512; Member since: 27 May 2012)
Nokia is currently no. 2
And sure it would have ranked the first with a huge difference to its rival Samsung if they adopted Android
23. Liveitup (Posts: 1193; Member since: 07 Jan 2014)
Without Microsoft Nokia would have died already. He should blame ok Nokia management for moving too slowly not those who still employs half of Nokia's workforce. Besides MS also layed off their own employees. Amy major acquisition always have layoffs. He shouldn't be a minister if he doesn't know this.
Besides MS have more than double the employees of Google and also more than Apple, the MS bashers should tell Google and Apple to hire them.
50. DontHateOnS60 (Posts: 850; Member since: 20 Apr 2009)
Ruthless? Are you kidding me? What do you think happens when a company takes over another that provides the same services?
Just because a company like MSFT has billions of dollars at its disposal doesn't mean it's just going to throw millions away paying people it doesn't need. That's how you drive a company into the ground and put everyone in the poor house.
Yeah it sucks for those people but it's not ruthless. It's the right way to run a company. You can't be worried about the jobs of a few thousand people you just acquired when you have the future of a multi-billion dollar company to worry about. You always need to be concerned with the bigger picture.
2. palmguy (Posts: 247; Member since: 22 Mar 2011)
Reminds me of how Palm webOS was done by HP. :(
3. itsdeepak4u2000 (Posts: 2604; Member since: 03 Nov 2012)
Instinct of killing Nokia by Mr. Flop.
30. rms.max (Posts: 74; Member since: 26 Sep 2012)
FLOP destroyed nokia. now it is proved that flop fanboys were lying then. flop & co. will destroy ms too.ms will miss bill gates. Trojan horse can win u a war but it might not be helpful to sustain it.
67. elitewolverine (Posts: 1556; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)
you lost some cells in that post.
When ELOP came onboard, Nokia was in a bad spot. They had 2 OS dev teams. Symbian which was old and clunky and being phased out, Meego which was hampered and didn't have a phone to show either Elop or the outgoing CEO.
People forget these two basic facts.
1. Android is free, developing for it is not, it takes time, teams and many other things. Even now, homebrew roms break things. LG/HTC/Samsung spend millions a year making android better as well as google. Nokia had an in house OS team, 2 of them. Bringing on a 3rd at the time and frame that Android was in, would have accomplished nothing at this time. They were bleeding money fast.
2. Windows OS allowed them OS freedom, not open source freedom, but reducing their OS team down to very little so they could focus on other things. MS team was responsible for the OS, from the ground up, android doesn't even come with a file manager (at the time). Win7 didn't need one by anymeans, the OS did it for you.
3. There is no guarantee that Android would have saved Nokia, the only reason why you even know of Nokia today is because of MS, not inspite of them. Lumia line is because MS allowed the Nokia team to concentrate on other systems. It was the hands off approach, not to mention if I remember correctly Nokia got Win for free.
4. For every beloved android you buy, you give billions upon billions to MS every year, because MS has patents, patents that the dear phones rely on.
4. billgates (banned) (Posts: 555; Member since: 29 May 2014)
I mean I understand lay offs and why Microsoft needed to slim down a good bit. I also see that it was a good amount of their folks. I was mad initially but now I feel sad for all involved
5. cse.vicky (Posts: 99; Member since: 10 Dec 2010)
The amount of effort put by Nokia on Windows phone. Imagine similar effort with Nokia + Android. This is like colonization over again.
6. rkoforever90 (Posts: 78; Member since: 03 Dec 2011)
ya why cant they just give up on windowsphone its not going to succeed anyway
7. billgates (banned) (Posts: 555; Member since: 29 May 2014)
I disagree, it doesn't have to be number one to be successful
8. JakeLee (banned) (Posts: 1021; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)
But 4% is pathetic, despite all the efforts.
It needs 10% at least for the critical mass.
9. Finalflash (Posts: 1720; Member since: 23 Jul 2013)
World wide it is 4% (which in BB's case got it the label of sinking ship) but individually in some countries it has 10%+. Still, once again MS is going to implant more of its claws in Nokia's engineering and what not and eventually screw up what little chance they had. This is classic of a large corporation that thinks too highly of itself and thinks it knows the answer when for the last 2 decades they haven't gotten anything right.
12. brrunopt (Posts: 503; Member since: 15 Aug 2013)
- "It needs 10% at least for the critical mass."
because ? Why not 9% ? or 11% ?
And it has reached over 10% in many countries , and is number 2 in some...
- BlackBerryOS , Tizen, Unbutu touch, Firefox OS, Sailfish,
lets kiil them first, they have even lower marketshare
24. Liveitup (Posts: 1193; Member since: 07 Jan 2014)
Its in double digits in ma.y countries around the world including the European union. It has surpassed iOS in over 20 odd countries. Its a marathon not a sprint.
43. Napalm_3nema (Posts: 919; Member since: 14 Jun 2013)
Your numbers are hilarious. 20 countries is less than a tenth of the total countries, and that 4% is based almost solely on a $99 phone that means less than nothing to the actual viability of a company in mobile. The situation is more dire than you think, especially when a low-margin, low app revenue generating phone accounts for more than 10% of all Windows Phones...ever.
54. brrunopt (Posts: 503; Member since: 15 Aug 2013)
the 520 only wen below 100€ last month
and the average sale price of a WP is 301$ worldwide, so no its not " based almost solely on a $99 phone"
68. elitewolverine (Posts: 1556; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)
Android would have taken more effort. You forget.
Android is free developing for it is not.
Nokia owned the smartphone market, yet because of a broken Symbian, and MeeGo that had no future (within Nokia). They lost.
To develop for android is to do what they have been doing, developing an OS, Nokia did not have the cash that Samsung had at the time.
MS allowed Nokia to Focus all that effort that you see today, without MS, Nokia would have been bought sold probably in 2012, it would have went the way of Motorola.
45. Napalm_3nema (Posts: 919; Member since: 14 Jun 2013)
Any relation to Pekka?
Antti Niemi > Antti Rinne
47. ArtSim98 (limited) (Posts: 2738; Member since: 21 Dec 2012)
You mean Pekka Rinne? The hockey goalie? No. I don't think they have any relations.
11. mustafansu (Posts: 4; Member since: 18 Nov 2012)
Nokia once said going with Android is like peeing in your pants for warmth. Now its like no pants at all. IMO they made a huge mistake back then out of their ego. If they adopted to Android even 2 years ago, with their superior design and imaging techniques, they would have been better than HTC and almost on par with Samsung. How wrong decisions can take an empire down.
I remember growing up everybody envied a Nokia phone as they were the cream of the pie and not everybody could afford. Its sad to see them getting broken up like this.
15. joey_sfb (Posts: 2894; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)
If Nokia went with Android. Stephen Elop mission had failed. He pretend to served the best interest for Nokia then. The truth has finally reveal that he is there to just to claim a stake for Microsoft.
21. JakeLee (banned) (Posts: 1021; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)
I agree that Nokia would be still alive with around 30% share among Android phones, the other 30% being Sammy's.
However, no one would make a single cent with Android then.
Sammy makes money only because of its absolute dominance. With roughly half of their current share, even Sammy would have it very hard making profits at all.
Android sucks that bad due to Linux and Java. They are both real pain in the a$$ for vendors :
- Linux is free only if your time has no value - Jamie Zawinski
- If Java had true garbage collection, most programs would delete themselves upon execution. – Robert Sewell
27. nasznjoka (Posts: 339; Member since: 05 Oct 2012)
You really are iGnorant! Tell you what? Linux is used in most servers than windows! And on the other side (mobile) I don't need to explain to you nomatter how ignorant you're still you know who's the boss around there! Java rocks 100x than C# and C# is a stolen (copy) from java! Blind fanboy
28. JakeLee (banned) (Posts: 1021; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)
Why do you talk about servers? Consumer products are thousands of miles off from servers.
Linux is a pain in the a$$ for all vendors, wasting lots of time. No exception here.
And many experts are simply fed up with Java :
Java is a DSL to transform big XML documents into long exception stack traces. – Scott Bellware
29. nasznjoka (Posts: 339; Member since: 05 Oct 2012)
You still are refering fellow ms fanboys sites as legit? That's just somebody's view
Linux is for power users. So when you say it sucks I really don't understand you. MSDOS can not match the power of linux so is WP crup can't match android regarless of your view that android sucks I don't know in which terms
37. JakeLee (banned) (Posts: 1021; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)
What do you think why most Android vendors are in financial crisis?
Because Android requires LOTS of resources for developing / maintaining.
That seriously harms the profitability.
Why is it so? Because Android sucks.
Android sucks with its Frankenstein nature - collection of junks that don't suit each other.
Android is a resource hogger both for the system and the finance.
Nokia recognized this and avoided it like leper. Unlike other vendors, Nokia had many choices.
It's just ironical that Nokia did the worst choice.
41. nasznjoka (Posts: 339; Member since: 05 Oct 2012)
Thought Microsoft just removed the license fees for WP but if that's the case which major oem have ever produced a single wp flagship? Cause it pays
42. JakeLee (banned) (Posts: 1021; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)
License fee is gone, the support isn't free though.
44. nasznjoka (Posts: 339; Member since: 05 Oct 2012)
You can not just say that all android oems are having loss because android and unix kernel sucks, resouce hogger or anything cause deep down you know that without these open source frameworks we could be still stuck in 1998 with IE7
49. JakeLee (banned) (Posts: 1021; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)
No, the industry would work better without Linux.
Linux is overly complex and way too bloated.
62. rusticguy (Posts: 2828; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)
Linux is bloated? Really?
How much do you know about Linux, beyond MS FUD of course?
63. joey_sfb (Posts: 2894; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)
You are an ignorant fool. You pretend to be an expert in OS kernel but you actual know nothing.
All OS kernel has root to UNIX including NT kernel and Linux.
Linux is complex for novice because they are fully customizable and are in use with all military including the ones in China, Russia and USA. Each and every one build their custom security layer.
59. mikelemon (Posts: 93; Member since: 21 Nov 2013)
Finally someone who speaks out against Android on here. There are so many Android fanboys (and sammyboys) that it isn;t even funny. They blindly follow them.
71. fireblade (Posts: 694; Member since: 27 Dec 2013)
Your saying proves that you are ignorant.
Linux is pain in the a$$ for vendors? Really? Maybe you check your WiFi router in your home why it has embedded linux in it.
Those quotes from Jamie Zawinski & Robert Sewell are only valid in the past when Linux & Java are not mature. Today Linux & Java is evolving & optimized. Do you know hotspot in Java? That will execute some codes faster even faster than native C. Many banks in the world use Java. It proves that Java is secure.
And for consumer products, I find MS products has many defects & weaknesses, like viruses, the need of defragment in NTFS, fail to boot just because a light problem, the need of primary partition to install the OS, and etc.
It only takes 15 minutes to install Ubuntu from the USB drive. Unlike MS Windows which takes hours to install windows 7.
Java is pain in the a$$? You should ask MS why you must install different version of .NET Framework 2, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5 just to run some programs. And .NET is slow & resource hog
17. Scott93274 (Posts: 879; Member since: 06 Aug 2013)
I'm sorry, but allowing Microsoft to buy Nokia was a really poor decision to begin with. They're a mangled mess of what used to be the most profitable company in the world. 4% market share is not enough to justify the amount of resources they're pouring into their mobile platform. People who say that they can do just fine with such a small number obviously cannot get it through their thick skulls why 18,000 people just lost their jobs.
Nokia would have been better off with Android.
19. gaara6775 (Posts: 286; Member since: 20 May 2014)
No matter what happens, don't use android . keep making wp. There is no competition & you guys are doing good job there.
55. wax33 (Posts: 45; Member since: 06 Apr 2014)
Uh. According to the logic of what they just did, if they keep losing money with WP, they should ditch it. In that case, Android seems the best alternative.
20. MartyK (Posts: 711; Member since: 11 Apr 2012)
I wonder what happen to all those Nokians, who claim it was a great idea for MS to be with Nokia!.
It's the camera.. Lol
They don't want to be another Android OEM.
Look at HTC and LG, they're not making money, hahaha
22. Scott93274 (Posts: 879; Member since: 06 Aug 2013)
Microsoft came to the game too late. The global market is already full of Android and iOS devices. To be honest, the only reason why I'm an Android user is because Apple was stupid and made the iPhone an AT&T exclusive. I've tried the iPhone after years with Android and I hate it, not because it isn't any good, it's just that I've already grown accustomed to the user interface of Android. Google always seems to have something up it's sleeve that's fun and exciting. And it's this reason why Microsoft won't grow beyond the minuscule share it has managed to carve out for itself. The global market pretty much already developed a preference before they even got out the gate. The only thing that could possibly save their mobile platform is innovation, and killer exclusive features/apps, and that's just not happening.
25. gazmatic (Posts: 604; Member since: 06 Sep 2012)
People keep harping the 4% figure. WP is a solid number 2 in dozens of markets. When Android came on the scene they had VERY little competition. WP has to fight an Android/IOS duopoly.
Literally meaning they have to convince ios and Android users to switch. This ain't easy for someone who invested so much in a platform.
Ask any Android or IOS users if they would switch overnight... Not just to windows but to either ios/Android, sailfish or bb... They won't.
Microsoft has an uphill battle. The fact that they are 4% globally and 2nd in several markets is a testament to their hard work.
They need to work harder and update faster but they are far from failing. They just need to give up on America and focus on Latin America, Europe and china
26. JakeLee (banned) (Posts: 1021; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)
Majority of Android users isn't even aware of the OS on their phones.
It just has to be cheap or free on contract for them to switch.
33. Trolloftheyear (banned) (Posts: 66; Member since: 16 Jul 2014)
You aren't aware of a good life. Seriously, get a life.
39. Scott93274 (Posts: 879; Member since: 06 Aug 2013)
Actually, JakeLee is probably correct. A lot of the people who buy a phone usually go with the model suggested to them by the idiot on the sales floor. My mom had an issue with hangouts on her Motorola Droid Razor Max HD running 4.4.2, so she went to a Verizon store to have them look at it. She ended up leaving with some POS phone running 4.1. She knows nothing about software or hardware, she simply wanted a phone that allowed her to apply custom ringtones to various contacts.
36. WinDroid (Posts: 77; Member since: 20 May 2014)
That's bs, almost everyone that has Android understand that is Android or at the very least "Google Play". Most Apple users won't switch because of all the apps they brought. I have a feeling a large minority if not a majority of android users haven't brought that many apps and the penalty for switching isn't as high as it is for IOS/Windows Phone. But the fact is, Android is cheaper, more stable, has more freedom in the actual OS and has more hardware choices. Nobody wants to switch from Android, it's still gaining market-share and so is Windows Phone. IOS not so much, rats are leaving it like the titanic. Everyone knows without Steve Jobs, Apple has no magic up their sleeves.
40. JakeLee (banned) (Posts: 1021; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)
You are the one talking BS.
You Androtakus simply don't know what's the "majority" to start with.
They are people like your parents, school girls around the corner that even don't bother watching movies on phones, satisfied with primitive things like ringtones, selfies, and SnapChat.
M$' executives are morons as well. They just have to release a palette of affordable, good looking 4.7~5.2" phones with 720p with a decent camera/loudspeaker.
It just has to be "balanced" without sounding very hi-tech or luxurious.
That would be a game changer.
46. nasznjoka (Posts: 339; Member since: 05 Oct 2012)
Majority of Android users isn't even aware of the OS on their phones.
It just has to be cheap or free on contract for them to switch.
guess what? the most successful wp device out there is LUMIA 520!