Is the Nokia X the reason Microsoft is buying Nokia?
1. tttony (Posts: 27; Member since: 22 Jul 2012)
Why not? M$ is desperate in enter OS mobile terrain
4. nokia12 (Posts: 325; Member since: 19 Nov 2013)
The answer to the title is very simple
it is because Mr.Flop who gets paid 25 million for destroying Nokia
7. Skoms (Posts: 118; Member since: 03 Feb 2014)
Mr Flop and Microsoft
Let nokia be a company for openess.
Nokia has done a Android Phone let people have freedom and choises
8. akki20892 (Posts: 3480; Member since: 04 Feb 2013)
Nokia shouldn't gone with wp. They should listen customers and fans. Because it's really important.
12. ihavenoname (Posts: 1406; Member since: 18 Aug 2013)
I'm Nokia fan, but thanks to WP, not a customer anymore.
24. Liveitup (Posts: 1260; Member since: 07 Jan 2014)
I am a fan and thanks to Windows Phone I am a customer, best mobile OS out there in my opinion so much so that Android, Apple and Android OEM's are copying WP design and features.
17. papss (unregistered)
They made the right and only logical choice. Stay away from my space..
18. akki20892 (Posts: 3480; Member since: 04 Feb 2013)
Calm down dude. Nokia is for everyone. Not For only you.
And Nokia shouldn't loose that much money dude. They made mistake to choose wp, if they choose android they will on samsung's position.
22. MySchizoBuddy (Posts: 53; Member since: 23 Aug 2011)
" if they choose android they will on samsung's position"
Can I borrow your magic ball. I need to make some more crazier predictions.
27. alterecho (Posts: 1082; Member since: 23 Feb 2012)
They made the mistake of choosing Elop, first non finnish, Microsoft agent, as their CEO.
20. corporateJP (Posts: 1555; Member since: 28 Nov 2009)
Nokia's board and Trojan Horse CEO really took the money and ran.
I only have WP because of Nokia, so after the smoke clears, it's really tough to see where my handset loyalty lies.
I like my Android tab and my iPad, I had some nice Android handsets. 8.1 better deliver if M$ wants to keep my business, however, it would be tough owning an M$-branded handset knowing full well that they're the ones that sunk Nokia from the inside.
2. mobi_user (Posts: 108; Member since: 18 Jun 2013)
M$ wants to have dominance in mobile world just as it has in PC world.
It will do anything to achieve that.
6. elitewolverine (Posts: 1628; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)
just like every other tech company....nothing new...
3. AppleConspiracy (Posts: 629; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)
I doubt it. Elop as Microsoft's "mole" in Nokia is here for a long time now (in terms of mobile industry) and would not allow it to happen without careful strategy from Microsoft, even before acquisition was announced.
"X" is simply a tool of simulating competition in order to raise main products in public perception. They are showing us that Android is only a budget solution for the masses, while Windows belong to mainstream devices, including flagship. It's Android incorporated into Windows system (UI etc.) and ranked below it, as a surrogate of some kind. That's the whole strategy, tested many times in history and proven succesful. Many products are just "dummies" to eliminate competition and this is the most cunning method.
9. IMda1 (Posts: 4; Member since: 25 Feb 2014)
You are absolutely right. Nokia created a hybrid, Microsoft UI with Android backend for apps compatability. Microsoft is trying to promote and hook people to MS services without the profits going to Google, just like the Kindle. If new hardware partners with MS want this Nokia X OS then market to them as well. If all goes well MS strategy will hit a home run. I have an Android phone now but I just want something new...soon...as least when 8.1 update is out.
10. domfonusr (Posts: 369; Member since: 17 Jan 2014)
I agree that this could not have been going on at Nokia for any length of time without Elop knowing about it. I share Michael's sentiment on what the "X" series could have been, maybe even should have been, and yet it seems unlikely that Microsoft didn't know about this in advance. For what it is worth, Elop has told us what the "X" series is now... not what it could have been or should have been. The question is: when did the "X" concept become what it is now? If it was this way all along, then I would question Microsoft's strategy decisions because I disagree with the idea that this is going to be some big nasty "fight-fire-with-fire" attack against Google's Android. This strategy just seems too short-term and anemic to have really done what Elop says it will. If it started out as something else, perhaps even as the long-term Asha replacement that it should have been, then I would question Elop's grip on the situation at Nokia. If Elop knew about this early on, I would think that he would have either accepted it for what it should have been, or drowned it early on just like he drowned "the burning platform", Symbian, and we would not be seeing this released at all (it would have ended up being the stuff of mobile phone myths and legends). Either way, now that we see what it is, and what it could and/or should have been, I have to wonder if Michael is absolutely right about Microsoft's motives for suddenly buying Nokia. I don't see the release of this "X", in its current role, as either smart for Microsoft's strategy or good for Nokia's business... perhaps this is what the proud Nokia design team was allowed to release before Microsoft had to swoop in and make sure that it didn't develop into a new long-term product line?
11. domfonusr (Posts: 369; Member since: 17 Jan 2014)
To me, it really seems much more likely that Microsoft had little choice but to honor the Nokia design team by letting them release this "X" that they had done so much work on, but that they really don't approve of it, and would rather just guarantee and justify its end by claiming to everyone else that it is some wild short-term strategic play to bolster long-term Windows Phone marketshare. To me, it seems much more like they had little choice, and had to cluge together a BS explanation for why it even exists. Maybe Elop screwed up and didn't see this coming... now they have to buy Nokia to assure that it doesn't keep being developed further.
5. elitewolverine (Posts: 1628; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)
That is a witches reasoning...what if this what if that. Google saw first hand how introducing their own devices with Motorola/Nexus line was hard as heck.
Plus you seem to forget in this article that MS racks in cash for every droid device sold.
The real reason is simple. Nokia got them in the door, buying out nokia made every other handset manufactuer know that MS was here to stay, especially with the 8.1 update.
13. threed61 (Posts: 130; Member since: 27 May 2011)
Or maybe Nokia decided s40 is outdated, and Windows Phone doesn't work as well with low budget phones as a forked Android device linked to MS services. I know not Byzantine enough.
15. domfonusr (Posts: 369; Member since: 17 Jan 2014)
See, that is what I thought was a great idea, too, but Elop and Microsoft say no.
I hope that Microkia still has a chance to turn around and say exactly that. If they would release an "X" phone that has lower specs... 1 GHz processor, 512 MB RAM, 2 Mpix camera, 3.5" HVGA screen, Bluetooth w/ Slam, WiFi, GPS, dual-SIM, changeable covers, and Android 4.4 fork, all for just 55 Euro (about $75) or something close to that... but good classic Nokia build quality, I'll bet it would sell great as an Asha replacement in emerging markets, and compete very well against Firefox OS and others in the low-cost smartphone space.
16. PBXtech (Posts: 980; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)
Personally, I see Nokia's and MS' world view to be completely different, which is interesting. Nokia dominated by controlling the low end market, but MS appears to want to dominate the upper market instead.
I see the X phones as being Plan B that was spoken of a year ago. Should the deal with MS not go through, they could fall back on Android. This was probably in the pipeline for a while and tweaked to fit the WP community at the last moment before release. Then again, maybe they wanted to fork Android and pass on Google services because they felt their own were good enough.(?)
19. domfonusr (Posts: 369; Member since: 17 Jan 2014)
Nokia dominated on the high end, too, until the iPhone arrived. They released the N95 in 2007, just before the iPhone, and that was their last great and truly-dominant high-end flagship.
The "X" phones didn't need to be a "Plan B", nor does it seem that either Microsoft or Elop are treating them as such. It is possible (though unlikely) that Nokia originally intended them to be a "Plan B", but that is not what they are now, according to Elop and others. Personally, I thought they would be a great replacement for the Asha line of phones, but apparently Microsoft doesn't seem to think so at the moment, and I think they are missing out on a great opportunity unless they change their minds about what the "X" can really be.
21. threed61 (Posts: 130; Member since: 27 May 2011)
You're right about the response to the iPhone, the bureaucracy at Nokia killed any chance of a speedy response to touch based phones and appropriate updates to Symbian.
I actually think MS is ok with the Android fork as long as it leads users to their services and interests them in higher end (WP) Nokia devices.
30. domfonusr (Posts: 369; Member since: 17 Jan 2014)
Yeah, a number of companies, Nokia included, saw touch devices as fad-ish, and thought that they would just pass by. The iPhone, as much as some of us dislike it, really did change the mobile world as we know it, and Nokia was not prepared. The Nokia 5800 XpressMusic, Nokia's initial answer to the iPhone, was released two years later, but, with a small-ish resistive touch screen and some unhealthy holdover concepts (like having to double-tap for just about everything), it was far too little too late to make a big difference. It also didn't help that S60 5th Edition was generally not liked because of its limitations (640x360 resolution foremost) and double-tapping UI. RIM also made similar mistakes with their initial answer to the iPhone, the BlackBerry Storm... like the clicking touch screen, for example, that was also generally frowned upon. It was as if they were all afraid to not differentiate their touch screen experiences from Apple's, and for good reason as Apple went after anyone who dared to make a phone anything like the iPhone; and yet, those are the companies who best survived those few years (Samsung, HTC, Motorola) immediately after the iPhone launched. Basically, the iPhone was the first to offer the mobile experience that the world was ultimately looking for at the time, and everyone who has survived well has done so by emulating that. Now, I suspect that there are new dynamics beginning to take hold these days, and some of the early survivors are not faring so well (Motorola, HTC) while some newer players have come to the field (Huawei, ZTE, Alcatel) and are dominating along with Samsung. It will be interesting to see what newer mobile experience really wins out in the next few years, and whose mobile vision finally carries the day.
23. PBXtech (Posts: 980; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)
I mentioned the low end because to this date, they still have the most sold phone in history, and it's a feature phone. Still quite a feat though.
I wish they would have kept the N950 going. As far as styling goes, I've always liked the look of the Asha 310 and the X7 the most. Symbian was a powerhouse, just fell behind, and Meego was so full of potential, it could have been as big as Android if they would have nurtured it better. When I look at companies like Nokia and BB, it's easy to see they got complacent and fell behind, and now it's costing them. Still not convinced WP is the answer to their problems but it's still being played out so we'll have to give it some more time to develop.
31. domfonusr (Posts: 369; Member since: 17 Jan 2014)
Personally, I thought the E7 was pretty neat. I do also like the look of some of the Asha's, like the 303 in particular. The Asha 302 also seemed like a beast of a feature phone, though without a touch screen. The days of those devices are now well past, though. In the Symbian-Linux struggle, Linux definitely won out as the premier mobile open-source project.
25. 7thspaceman (Posts: 1087; Member since: 14 Feb 2011)
It seems to me that Nokia was ready to go to a forked version of Android after Microsoft turned down the first offer to buy Nokia. then as you know Nokia got away from Siemens who had some control over Nokia and Then Microsoft put in a bid to buy Nokia. The Nokia Mobile assets sale to Microsoft will be completed in a few weeks. expect the hear and read about within 2 weeks. Microsoft has already set up a position for Mr Elop to fill when he returns to Microsoft which was Julie Larson's VP Position I kind of like her and am sorry to see her bumped out of the position but she may have already been told it was a temporary position when she got it. I do not know Microsoft internal politics.
28. elitewolverine (Posts: 1628; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)
Nothing hurts ms by forking android other than a google version, but even then they rake in cash.
If anything the purchase was to let other OEM's know that MS is here to stay, for awhile it was up in the air. Now that OEM's know that MS will support their phones, especially as they did with the 8 line, and the 8.1 loosening its grip on requirements. Means OEM's will not have fear of slapping WinPhone as an OS on the exact same Hardware.
26. Liveitup (Posts: 1260; Member since: 07 Jan 2014)
I agree with the first part of your comment, however in regard's to Larson she was good but Elop is better suited for that role, id like to see others like Joe Belfiore get replaced, he's terrible, though it doubt he will be replaced, Larson is better suited overseeing the unification of experiences across different services, including Skype, Bing and OneDrive.
WP should have been at least 15% by now, if Google or Apple designed WP, they would have done a better job marketing the product.