

Nokia Is Said to Be Near Software Partnership With Microsoft - petethomas
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-02-09/nokia-is-said-to-be-near-software-partnership-with-microsoft.html

======
DanI-S
I love Nokia's hardware, and have great respect for Microsoft's mobile team.
But I'm not sure whether two dinosaurs together can run faster than one.

~~~
jacabado
What is the track record of Microsoft in this kind of partnerships?

Genuine question.

~~~
SwellJoe
You'd have to define "this kind of partnership". There are a number of mobile
device makers building Windows phones. And there have been many co-development
and branding deals over the years with Microsoft and PC makers. Many have been
successful, many have failed.

This, however, brings to mind the OS/2 deal, to me. If Microsoft culture is
anything like it was in the 90s (which may not be the case), I would expect
Microsoft to be a loyal partner with Nokia until such time as it is
advantageous for them to go their own way, leaving Nokia holding the bag on a
jointly developed "standard" platform that no one else wants.

But, hey, I'm a cynical old nerd that's been involved in technology too long.
The fact that Microsoft is a distant third, and losing ground daily, in the
market might make a difference in how they treat their friends.

~~~
brudgers
The supposed Microsoft Nokia partnership isn't joint development of a phone
OS. It looks more likely that Nokia could get out of the OS business
altogether.

I'm not sure that OS/2 is the best analogy. That wasn't a hardware company and
software company teaming up. And it is unlikely that Nokia and Microsoft will
evolve to become direct competitors in the way IBM and Microsoft did in the
late 1980's and early 90's.

~~~
SwellJoe
"I'm not sure that OS/2 is the best analogy. That wasn't a hardware company
and software company teaming up."

I can't make any sense of this statement. IBM was the _definitive_ hardware
company at the time. Microsoft was the _definitive_ software company at the
time. What kind of companies do you think they were?

"The supposed Microsoft Nokia partnership isn't joint development of a phone
OS."

As far as I can tell, we have no idea what sort of partnership they have in
mind. But, I would expect Nokia to want a unique value, if they build Windows
phones. And they have a huge development workforce, and have made numerous
software acquisitions over the years. I'd be surprised if they don't plan to
write some code, too.

~~~
philwelch
IBM was a systems company, not a hardware company. The difference is that a
hardware company doesn't, by and large, develop their own software.

Apple is another example of a systems company.

~~~
SwellJoe
"IBM was a systems company, not a hardware company. The difference is that a
hardware company doesn't, by and large, develop their own software."

You can't have it both ways. Nokia makes the vast majority of their own
software and has for years. They have a huge software development staff, and
have acquired a number of major software shops to augment it.

And, while we're on the subject, in the PC market, IBM did _not_ , by and
large, develop their own software. They contracted out to Microsoft to make
the OS in the beginning, and then teamed up with them to make OS/2. So,
technically, I guess you can't compare the two because Nokia makes a lot more
of the software on its devices than IBM made on its early PCs. But, that's the
opposite of the argument you've made above.

I don't think it really matters, though. I think this is a mistake for Nokia,
and I think time will bear that assertion out.

And, of course, if you don't like the IBM and OS/2 comparison, how about SGI
and Windows NT? That was a unique relationship between a hardware (and
software) company and Microsoft that had disastrous consequences for SGI.

~~~
philwelch
_Nokia makes the vast majority of their own software and has for years._

Hence the premise, "It looks more likely that Nokia could get out of the OS
business altogether". Without that premise; yes, Nokia is obviously IBM. So
question that premise rather than the validity of the argument, if that's your
intention. I myself think it's a shaky premise, but _given that premise_ ,
Nokia isn't IBM.

 _And, while we're on the subject, in the PC market, IBM did not, by and
large, develop their own software_

IBM had literally _decades_ of experience developing their own software for
every other type of computer before PC's even existed. Likewise, Nokia has
decades of experience developing embedded software for cellular phones. Has
Nokia matched iOS or Android yet? No, and neither had IBM matched the Apple
II.

The company-defining question is where one goes from there--IBM adopted DOS as
a stopgap but quickly worked to develop OS/2, first with Microsoft and then
without them (hence attempting--and failing--to remain a systems company).
Nokia has attempted to develop Symbian, but if they drop Symbian and decide to
adopt Windows Phone (which, again, was expressly the premise of that comment),
they would move in the opposite direction, like Tandy did.

------
azakai
So, Nokia is said to prefer a 'partnership' with Microsoft, as opposed to
being just another hardware vendor working with Google's Android. That means
Nokia would have a special status with Windows Phone 7.

Would the other hardware vendors Microsoft has been working with be kicked
out, leaving WP7 to run only on Nokia hardware? I find it hard to think of any
other 'special status' Nokia can have, if other vendors also offer WP7 phones.
Or would other vendors be forced to offer ones with severe limitations, to
differentiate Nokia's? If so it seems to not make sense for the other vendors.

Also not sure why it makes sense for Microsoft. Giving Nokia special status
means limiting the amount of hardware vendors. Perhaps Microsoft just wants to
do the iPhone thing - tightly integrated software+hardware - but they could
have done that in-house, like the did with Zune. Why have a single hardware
vendor that isn't themselves?

For Nokia, I can see how this might make sense - they have had lots of delays
while developing their software platform, and Microsoft has a viable one now.
However, it seems it would make much more sense for Nokia to just fork
Android, which is also a viable platform, and a more popular one at that.
Also, it is free of cost, unlike WP7.

So overall this is very odd, but I guess the details will come out soon, and
maybe it will make more sense.

~~~
potatolicious
> _"However, it seems it would make much more sense for Nokia to just fork
> Android, which is also a viable platform, and a more popular one at that.
> Also, it is free of cost, unlike WP7."_

I've seen WP7 run faster on remarkably little hardware - it's a lot like iOS
in that sense. Where even Froyo would lurch and struggle, iOS and WP7 have
been shown to make very snappy experiences out of relatively old hardware.

This can potentially lend a _lot_ of hardware advantages. The current "we have
N core in our phones!" race that HTC, LG, Moto, and Samsung are running in is
in no small part due to the lackluster performance of Android. The only
apparent solution is to throw more and more hardware at it (and to be fair,
it's working, the latest generation of Android devices are finally as snappy
as my pokey 500MHz iPhone).

But consumers don't care about their megahurtz or their cores. They want a
snappy UI that works for them - if Nokia can create a better experience for
less hardware, they pocket that difference. This can also confer spec-sheet
advantages that customers _do_ care about - e.g. battery life.

Secondly, as a "preferred partner" for MS, Nokia might have some say over
where the platform goes. I think it's pretty safe to say that Google does what
it wants with Android, and if Nokia wanted a feature they'd have to wait in
line like everyone else. Given the poor sales of WP7 so far, I'm betting MS is
willing to bend over backwards and Nokia may get to drive the platform
development in a big way.

~~~
StavrosK
I don't know about that, my iPhone 3G was unusable even before 4 was released,
which doesn't bode very well for iOS. On the other hand, Android is very
responsive on a $200 Samsung S, which can't be that much faster than the 3G...

~~~
YooLi
iPhone 3G has an ARM11 620 MHz processor (underclocked to 412 MHz). I'm not
sure what a Samsung S is (Galaxy S? Nexus S?), but if you are referring to a
Galaxy S, the Galaxy S is quite a bit faster.

~~~
StavrosK
Sorry, it's called Galaxy 3.

------
brudgers
Unlike many other phone manufacturer's (and like Apple), Nokia has long placed
strategic value on phone operating systems. For a company with that tradition,
a Microsoft solution makes sense as a replacement for inhouse OS development
because Microsoft's core business model is B2B (unlike Google and Apple).

In other words, nobody is likely to question Microsoft's ability to deliver
and support a company the size of Nokia given their track record with large
worldwide companies. Nor are people likely to question Microsoft's ability to
provide user support when WP7 is placed on commodity phones given their track
record with Windows.

What the article misses is that the first victim of Microsoft Nokia
partnership is likely to be RIM. A Microsoft and Nokia partnership is likely
to be a powerful player in enterprise. And from a strategic perspective,
Microsoft can benefit even if the partnership is not a cash cow because it
allows them to solidify the vertical extents of their product line. Reducing
the penetration of Android and iOS into the enterprise isn't a bad thing for
Microsoft either.

[Edit] Pitching Java in favor of .Net may also be a factor influencing Nokia's
thinking - given the way Oracle has been acting recently.

------
dlevine
It's a bit surprising that Nokia wouldn't go for another Linux-based platform
(Android), but I guess that anything is better than their current strategy.

I guess that WP7 will allow them to provide an alternative to all the Android
devices out there, and unlike Android, they could potentially be the premier
WP7 vendor if they execute correctly.

~~~
ericb
There are still millions of windows users, and the phone is quickly becoming
the computer. If you can make phones do "computer things" in away that is just
like the computer these folks are used to, you might have an angle of attack,
which is more than nokia has now.

Betting on the same plan as your nimbler competitors is a dominated strategy
game theory-wise.

------
abless
Not exactly surprising considering Elop's background.

~~~
SwellJoe
Yeah, everyone keeps trying to make this into a technical or business
decision, when it's clearly not. Partnering with an also-ran doesn't make
sense except in the context of Elop coming from Microsoft and bringing along a
team of softies.

Only a Microsoft fanatic would look at the mobile landscape right now and
think, "I know, I'll team my struggling company up with those guys. They
really know what they're doing."

~~~
brudgers
Microsoft knows how to work with large companies - and look at the
alternatives to WP7:

1\. In house development. Nokia has "been there done that" 2\. Android -
Google's B2B track record isn't all that great. 3\. iOS [just kidding]

------
yewweitan
If Nokia were to do this, then they had better find a way to make developer
migration/adoption as frictionless as possible.

We're talking about smartphones here, which are going to be driven by
developers to some extent. A whole scale migration from Symbian/MeeGo to
something else is going to be a messy one for sure, one that's definitely
going to anger the current crop of developers.

With frameworks like Qt in place, which makes it easy for developers to build
for all Nokia platforms, I tend to think that Nokia would not to go down the
path of an OS overhaul.

Then again, anything is possible when you've got billions of dollars in
revenue. It could be anything from an OS switch, to a new version of Qt which
natively compiles Python, Ruby, JS, etc

EDIT: this - <http://venturebeat.com/2011/02/09/nokia-cancels-meego-phone/>

seems to make one wonder even more about Nokia is up to

~~~
Geee
The first "MeeGo" phone was designed to run Maemo 6 and was set to be released
in 2010. MeeGo changed plans and the hardware was ready to be scrapped. The
successor is in development.

I'd believe WP7 could replace Symbian in mid-range phones, and MeeGo is
reserved for really high-end phones and tablets (possibly for x86-devices
only). MeeGo and Qt won't go anywhere though, even if Nokia doesn't use them.

------
51Cards
If this pans out it may prove to be one of the most interesting changes in the
mobile landscape for awhile. Nokia has the hardware capabilities and while I
don't personally like it, MS has come up with a pretty good OS which I'm sure
is only going to evolve rapidly. Don't think anything I've seen yet will pry
my Android out of hands but I would love to see his pan out and form another
big mobile player. I think the market can easily support 3 solid platforms.

------
DjDarkman
I see this as the last nail in Nokia's coffin. Android has a lot of momentum,
Windows Phone 7 is "barely" out. Again Nokia plunges into uncertainty instead
of competing with other manufacturers on the hardware front.

------
Anechoic
If true, I wonder what this means for Mac syncing. Nokia's Mac software works
wonderfully with the E71 and I'd hate to see that go by the wayside.

