x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options
    Close






Finnish finance minister claims Microsoft has “betrayed” Finland

0. phoneArena 21 Jul 2014, 07:46 posted on

Last week, Satya Nadella disclosed that Microsoft is about to lay off roughly 18,000 employees worldwide. Some 12,500 of these were former employees of one of the largest corporations in Finland – Nokia. Normally, this particular piece of news caused a severe media backlash at Microsoft and the former CEO of Nokia, Stephen Elop, who did not choose the best words to inform his ex-employees that they are about to get the sack pretty soon. Ouch...

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 07:54 12

1. bucky (Posts: 2700; 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.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 08:35 9

13. Johnnokia (Posts: 1108; 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

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 10:44

35. vasra (Posts: 10; 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.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 08:39 2

14. NexusX (Posts: 521; Member since: 16 May 2013)


Nokia's got 13000 employees making a few flagships every year, and you wonder why they were going under?

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 08:52 5

16. Ashoaib (Posts: 3229; 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

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 10:30 1

31. NokiaFTW (Posts: 2072; 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.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 10:43 5

34. alterecho (Posts: 1098; 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.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 13:15

51. NokiaFTW (Posts: 2072; 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.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 16:01

57. Liveitup (Posts: 1798; 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.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 20:04

66. Johnnokia (Posts: 1108; 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

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 09:37 2

23. Liveitup (Posts: 1798; 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.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 12:03 1

50. DontHateOnS60 (Posts: 867; 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.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 07:58 4

2. palmguy (Posts: 574; Member since: 22 Mar 2011)


Reminds me of how Palm webOS was done by HP. :(

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 08:00 6

3. itsdeepak4u2000 (Posts: 3718; Member since: 03 Nov 2012)


Instinct of killing Nokia by Mr. Flop.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 10:26

30. rms.max (Posts: 95; 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.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 20:35 1

67. elitewolverine (Posts: 5188; 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.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 08:06 1

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

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 08:07 3

5. cse.vicky (unregistered)


The amount of effort put by Nokia on Windows phone. Imagine similar effort with Nokia + Android. This is like colonization over again.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 08:11 12

6. rkoforever90 (Posts: 282; Member since: 03 Dec 2011)


ya why cant they just give up on windowsphone its not going to succeed anyway

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 08:13 1

7. billgates (banned) (Posts: 555; Member since: 29 May 2014)


I disagree, it doesn't have to be number one to be successful

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 08:16 8

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.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 08:25 2

9. Finalflash (Posts: 3224; 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.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 08:32 1

12. brrunopt (Posts: 742; 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

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 09:11

18. JakeLee (banned) (Posts: 1021; Member since: 02 Nov 2013)


What's your point?

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 09:38 4

24. Liveitup (Posts: 1798; 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.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 11:38 1

43. Napalm_3nema (Posts: 2227; 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.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 14:48

54. brrunopt (Posts: 742; 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"

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 20:38

68. elitewolverine (Posts: 5188; 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.

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 08:25

10. ArtSim98 (Posts: 3535; Member since: 21 Dec 2012)


It's Antti Rinne. Not Anti :p

posted on 21 Jul 2014, 11:41

45. Napalm_3nema (Posts: 2227; Member since: 14 Jun 2013)


Any relation to Pekka?
Antti Niemi > Antti Rinne

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories