[Mika]

Yesterday there was Nokia shareholders' meeting which resulted in a class action lawsuit preparation in the US and a 10 % drop in the value per share. Things look pretty grim for small shareholders, and understandably they put quite a lot of pressure on Stephen Elop during his presentation. Some people are saying that Elop is Microsoft's Mole and plan to crash and prepare the company for a corporate takeover, but I don't see the advantage of the Microsoft doing that. Though, most of the strategic decisions in the recent year do favor Microsoft, but it is a question if criminal negligence has actually happened. But for the takeover strategy, I think that if Nokia burns, so does Windows Phone, and so do Microsoft's ambitions on expanding to the mobile market, no other phone manufacturer will want to deal with them.

Then I have seen some comments about Microsoft killing the Qt platform, they got rid of open source Symbian and more so MeeGo, the Linux derivative. This has been proposed as a strategy where Microsoft cannot lose with the Nokia deal while it kills one of their greatest threats, but I'm a little bit suspicious about that too. The reason is, if Nokia goes under, the Microsoft path will then be remembered by quite a lot of people for burning their cash and it is a question whether Microsoft can change their buying habits more friendly towards them after this incident. Even though I don't have anything at stake with Nokia, but if the company goes under, I will not buy a Microsoft product ever again. And no such stuff gets installed to my work computer either.

Does anyone have any thoughts to share about this?

[The E]

So Nokia makes bad business decisions, and you hate on Microsoft? Explain the connection please, cos I am not seeing it.

Then I have seen some comments about Microsoft killing the Qt platform, they got rid of open source Symbian and more so MeeGo, the Linux derivative.

Aren't those Nokia technologies? How is Microsoft, who I am pretty sure don't own any of them, killing them?

[Mika]

Nokia has no-doubt made bad decisions before, but after the Microsoft deal, they set a new world record in corporate losses - both in size and in speed. Previous CEO was fired because of the losses he generated in around four years, current CEO did worse in 15 months. Not enough connection for you? Fine, former Microsoft employees are being installed in the leading positions within the company, basically people without a good understanding of the mobile phone business. On the other hand, it is mainly the US shareholders that have been pushing the company towards Microsoft, so in a way they probably caught some of the fallout themselves. After the strategic change, it was exactly the former Microsoft worker whose message singlehandedly destroyed the sales of Symbian and MeeGo, but the board of directors did not react to that back then. Not to mention firing most of the development teams for these systems.

Microsoft, by the way, has a full access to Nokia's patent portfolio, and if the slice & dice of the company happens due to net profitability problems, Microsoft will aim to own the portfolio completely. Good news for anyone with a mobile phone, I suppose?

No, I just don't let the destruction of a company that in its best time produced several percents of national GDP go away like nothing happened. This will indeed be remembered, and despite Nokia's own stupidity, Microsoft does have a hand in play.

[NGTM-1R]

Nokia was a terrible company long before this happened; c.f. their going full retard and patent trolling Qualcomm and numerous other low-end phone manufacturers five-six years ago.

[The E]

Sooooo, Nokia made decisions that were bad enough that the sharks are smelling the blood, and you blame the sharks for taking a bite. Sorry, but that's just business.

In the end, I am suffering from a severe disability. I cannot for the life of me understand why someone would exhibit such levels of loyalty to a company, even after said company demonstrates that they do not understand the market anymore.

[Mika]

Sooooo, Nokia made decisions that were bad enough that the sharks are smelling the blood, and you blame the sharks for taking a bite. Sorry, but that's just business.

In the end, I am suffering from a severe disability. I cannot for the life of me understand why someone would exhibit such levels of loyalty to a company, even after said company demonstrates that they do not understand the market anymore.

Huh? Since when did I explicitly say Microsoft should NOT be doing this? The thing I said is that if Nokia goes under, it likely has consequences for Microsoft too. To quote your own words, "that's just business". It may not happen world wide, but here, quite a lot of people have lost either their jobs and/or their money due to dealings with Microsoft. Do you seriously think it doesn't affect their judgment at all?

But please look at the thread title, I asked how do you see the future of both companies. I presented a couple of mine to start the discussion. I was mainly interested if people from the other countries see the fate of Nokia affecting Microsoft, because it is relatively hard to judge from here. Here it will, but how about elsewhere?

[The E]

Microsoft won't be affected by this in any big way. They may have to talk someone into building Windows phones, but I am willing to bet that phones aren't a big market for MS; tablets probably are, and Nokia didn't make those.

[Mika]

Microsoft won't be affected by this in any big way. They may have to talk someone into building Windows phones, but I am willing to bet that phones aren't a big market for MS; tablets probably are, and Nokia didn't make those.

I'm not sure. Partially the reason why I think Microsoft wants to deal with Nokia is that the mobile phone is predicted to replace a laptop at some point of time, and the Microsoft would not have any running operating system around there. Additionally, there are about a billion mobile phone devices around, each one of them could potentially have a licensed operating system. Additionally, the replacement cycle is relatively fast, which means new operating system versions too. Yes, currently phones are not big for Microsoft, but I think they are looking at the growth potential too.

Nokia is planning to introduce a tablet. If that will ever come to the markets before the company tanks, that's another thing. Some former Nokia people are saying that this is insanity again, because tablets have little in common with mobile phones and a lot more with computers.

[The E]

Partially the reason why I think Microsoft wants to deal with Nokia is that the mobile phone is predicted to replace a laptop at some point of time

With tablets as an intermediate step. Getting a foothold in the tablet market is not a bad thing.

there are about a billion mobile phone devices around, each one of them could potentially have a licensed operating system.

Nope. Most phone users, just like most computer users, will not replace the OS on their devices. Oh, and all of those phones have a licensed OS running on them already.

the replacement cycle is relatively fast, which means new operating system versions too

Nope. While it is not inconceivable for a majority of users to switch phones every 18 to 24 months, OS cycles are about as long as desktop OS cycles; Just look at how long Android 2.3 was the "current" Android version. Hell, even now that Android 4 has been out for quite some time, the market is still dominated by 2.3.

There certainly is a niche for MS to enter into the mobile device market. But it does not depend on Nokia being around; Given how easy it is to produce a reference hardware design, it's just a matter of finding someone willing to build and market it (like Google did with the Nexus). And again, tablets are closer to MS' comfort zone, with most of the big MS products being portable to them without much loss of functionality.

[Mika]

I don't recall any pure mobile phone manufacturer succeeding with tablets, it has been the phone manufacturers that also do laptops that has worked. The reason is the component differences between phones and tablets; tablets are simply closer to laptops than phones. Basically this means redoing the parts distribution channel, not a small feat in itself. Having a foothold there is not a bad thing, but at this stage this is a very dangerous move from Nokia, when even their phones do not sell. For Microsoft I suppose this doesn't matter.

Phone users are divided between feature phone users and smart phone users. Of all the statistics, I don't know if "most phone users" refers to feature phone or smartphone users or both of them. If I used a feature phone that worked, I would not replace the UI OS either. Smartphone users, I don't know. Which users are included in the older Android version staying in the market? Yes, I probably should have written "Microsoft licensed operating system".

I think Microsoft will find even harder to market Windows Phones if Nokia tanks. Microsoft has already burned their relationships with several large operators and I think the demise of Nokia is going to make them look rather unattractive for other operators or mobile phone manufacturers. The reason why Nokia sold that well with such mediocre phones seems to have been mainly the good carrier relationships, which deteriorated when Microsoft hopped on board. Don't get me wrong, Nokia was already straining them with a couple of phone fiascos, but the real separation happened when CEO from Microsoft was announced.

[The E]

I don't recall any pure mobile phone manufacturer succeeding with tablets, it has been the phone manufacturers that also do laptops that has worked.

Asus and Amazon make phones?

The reason is the component differences between phones and tablets; tablets are simply closer to laptops than phones.

Uhhh, no. The only differences between a Smartphone SOC and a tablet SOC are RAM chips, storage chips, Display, and case.
 

Basically this means redoing the parts distribution channel, not a small feat in itself.

Nope, see above.

Having a foothold there is not a bad thing, but at this stage this is a very dangerous move from Nokia, when even their phones do not sell. For Microsoft I suppose this doesn't matter.

If Nokia dies, it dies. Why do you feel so attached to it?

Phone users are divided between feature phone users and smart phone users.

Define "feature phone".

Of all the statistics, I don't know if "most phone users" refers to feature phone or smartphone users or both of them. If I used a feature phone that worked, I would not replace the UI OS either.

If a feature phone is a non-smartphone mobile, then you wouldn't be able to anyway.

Smartphone users, I don't know. Which users are included in the older Android version staying in the market? Yes, I probably should have written "Microsoft licensed operating system".

Yes, you probably should have. Android phones are, without exception, smartphones.

I think Microsoft will find even harder to market Windows Phones if Nokia tanks.

Not really, no. If MS wants to have success, all they need to do is produce a good OS (which they have), and get a decent handset that runs it. The new Atom-based smartphones that Intel is promoting would fit that bill quite nicely.

Microsoft has already burned their relationships with several large operators and I think the demise of Nokia is going to make them look rather unattractive for other operators or mobile phone manufacturers.

Please provide proof of this.

The reason why Nokia sold that well with such mediocre phones seems to have been mainly the good carrier relationships, which deteriorated when Microsoft hopped on board.

I'd argue that it was because Nokia dumbphones were cheap and had a good reputation. You seem to be forgetting that Nokia's attempts to promote their own OS (Symbian), which was incompatible to both Android and iOS, were mostly responsible for Nokia's failure to secure a big marketshare in the smartphone market. They tried to turn it around by skipping Android and going straight to the next big release (Win 8), a move that was doomed to failure from the start, given that the integrated world that Windows 8 is built around (with XBLive, SkyDrive, and all those other cloud services) isn't there yet.

Don't get me wrong, Nokia was already straining them with a couple of phone fiascos, but the real separation happened when CEO from Microsoft was announced.

So? What, I ask again, is the big deal? You go on and on about how great a company Nokia was, and how MS supposedly ruined them (when they were perfectly capable of ruining themselves), but what's the point?

[Mika]

No, Amazon and Asus don't make phones, but so?

Uhhh, no. The only differences between a Smartphone SOC and a tablet SOC are RAM chips, storage chips, Display, and case.

Your expertise in this area being what exactly? Companies that produce thousands of pieces per year already place certain requirements for all components included, companies that go for mass production have completely different design rules. I.e. if one component isn't on the approved list, it basically doesn't exist. Getting qualified for component provider requires all sorts of testing that does take a lot of time, and requires participation in the cost analysis too. Several Nokia personnel had some interesting hindsights of circuit inlet designs, removing a single inlet from a PCB saved the company something like 5 millions. The design guys were celebrated as heroes.

If Nokia dies, it dies. Why do you feel so attached to it?

Business is business, but where is the being attached to it part? If Nokia wants to blow their cash on tablets, it's their decision - it doesn't affect me one bit. What I'm afraid is the resulting fallout of the IP. The company basically holds most of the important patents in mobile business, and if this is of any indication, the patent trolling has only just begun. And Nokia already admitted in Bloomberg that they see the patents as a way to increase revenue.

Even Nokia's older dumb phones had an OS that was possible to update. I did it a couple of times with a 3310. I have understood feature phone being somewhere between dumb phone and smart phone, dumb phones being gradually replaced by feature phones, while current feature phone users are moving to smart phones.

I'd be surprised if Microsoft found a handset maker that would like to deal with them if Nokia goes under. The reason being this. Also, the integration of Skype isn't well received on the operator side. What it comes to proof, top Nokia marketing executive resigned after working for 20 years in the company, he achieved 77% market share in China before, but resigns after working for some time for Windows Phone. The same for the guy who was recruited from Samsung to Microsoft, and switched job after only 6 months. If there was a chance to success, I don't think these guys would have moved away. The other option is to look at sold phones in total, and see the decline after February of 2011. This is just after Microsoft strategy was announced, before that Nokia's direction lead to winning the mobile business.

I thought that Qt is the actual Nokia's ecosystem. This ecosystem does support Android, Symbian and Meego - basically pretty much anything but Windows Phone.

So? What, I ask again, is the big deal? You go on and on about how great a company Nokia was, and how MS supposedly ruined them (when they were perfectly capable of ruining themselves), but what's the point?

If Nokia ruining itself means going under Microsoft in the first place, that's a point. Otherwise, Nokia was not actually failing before - seems they had just gotten over the bad stuff from 2006. The direction they were going was actually right in the global scale.

[Mika]

And begun the patent trolling has. Nokia and Microsoft sue Apple over core patent violations.

It is rather telling that Nokia has had this capability for a long time, but they have elected not to use it before Mosaid took control of these patents.

[NGTM-1R]

Nokia was a terrible company long before this happened; c.f. their going full retard and patent trolling Qualcomm and numerous other low-end phone manufacturers five-six years ago.

[Mika]

Reporting live from the trenches of the Great Patent War - watch out for the flying law suits and DUCK IF ORDERED TO - it has come to our attention that Google requires royalties from Xbox and Windows 7 sales. The only thing missing now is Apple counter-suing both Nokia-Microsoft and Google to fill-in the love triangle. Countless lawyers are working day and night to figure out a weakness in the others' defences, so sleep well citizens, your money is at good hands!

Gotta love the American business mentality! The mobile phone development probably just slowed down a notch... Now was Nokia actually that bad after all regarding the patent trolling? In reality, they were actually one of the most benevolent global scale companies founded, having been able to crush the competition several times with cut-throat pricing and patent trolling had they wanted to. And I'm actually glad they didn't!

But popcorn and beers, anyone? This stuff can't be taken too seriously anymore, and the further it gets the more entertaining it indeed becomes! While you are at it, raise the game on the next level and bring back the good old character assassinations, muggings and beatings!

[The E]

How nice of you not to post any links.