

Elop running out of time to turn Nokia around - denzil_correa
http://sg.m.yahoo.com/w/legobpengine/news/elop-running-time-turn-nokia-around-102511392--finance.html

======
lawdawg
When people ask why Nokia isn't selling a lot of Lumias, most people,
correctly, answer "Windows Phone". Going with Android puts them in a much
better position than Windows Phone for a lot of reasons, and every negative
that can be said about going with Android (minus the OS differences) can be
said about Windows Phone. The only difference is that Nokia is pretty much the
only OEM that is all-in with Windows Phone, but once WP becomes popular, whats
to stop Samsung, etc from making more WPs? Nothing really, and at that point,
Nokia will only be able to distinguish itself with its hardware (since there
are limited/no OEM/carrier modifications allowed to WP) which is WORSE off
than if they were using Android right now.

------
mtgx
The real link:

[http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/19/us-nokia-
strategy-...](http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/19/us-nokia-strategy-
idUSBRE88I0IQ20120919)

I wonder if they will quickly switch to Android if they will kick Elop out and
decide the Microsoft partnership has failed. That would be great news in my
book.

~~~
matt4711
there are so many established android players already. I doubt that would help
them much.

At least the premium W8 strategy differentiates them from samsung and co.

~~~
bad_user
It would be pretty easy for Nokia to enter the Android market.

All it would need to do is to create 2 phone models, one for the low end, one
for the high end, both with good build quality and that come in various
colors.

And on the software side all they'd need to do would be to install the stock
Android distribution, with the logistics and resources necessary to release
Android updates over-the-air as soon as possible, while giving the insurance
that customers will get updates for 2 years after they've bought the phone.
They could also disallow carries from installing crap on these phones. They
could further differentiate by bundling those phones with some premium Nokia
apps, like an alternative to Google Maps with better offline capabilities.

Then they should also build an Android tablet, because there's really no
competition to the iPad.

Like really, there are lots of Android "players" out there, but (1) Nokia
still has resources and a huge distribution network available with lots of
partners + (2) Android's true potential has yet to reveal itself and the pie
will get a lot bigger + (3) everybody is doing it wrong.

~~~
se85
It's really no where near as simple as that, not even close.

There is lots of politics, and red tape to keep in mind as well that has to be
overcome before they can even think about Android, let alone delivering on it.

Getting rid of Elop, really doesn't change this painful process of software
migration (which is never, ever "pretty easy") or everyone else that thinks
Nokia/Android is a terrible idea from a business perspective (it is).

Nokia has already had to go through all of this recently to accomodate the
Microsoft Plan, and it is just extremely unlikely that a company the size of
Nokia could survive a second transition and come out the other end smelling
like roses.

We are talking at least a year (and thats being very conservative and ignoring
all existing and future plans that are currently in place that would need to
be dismantled) before there would be a tangible Nokia Android product. There
is also the large layoffs and rehires that would need to occur during this
transition and this stuff takes time, lots of time when talking about a
company at the scale of Nokia. I'd imagine they would lose lots of partners
over this transition as well, the list is endless.

My bet is it would be another year or two on top of that before Nokia was at
its current state as of today on the market with Android instead of Windows,
except the market will be much bigger, and Nokia will be much smaller, but hey
at least they have an Android phone right? ;-)

I'm sure Microsoft has Nokia by the balls as well (contractually speaking),
which is just another reason amongst many others not to attempt such a
transition from the business perspective. Also, it would be a very tough sell
to the stakeholders, and upper management, as well as everyone else on the
front lines that such a move would yield anything for Nokia besides a quicker
path to hard times ahead and/or bankruptcy.

The cards are all on the table, it's too late to make an "effective"
transition and they know this.

In an ideal world, business wouldn't get in the way of releasing a good
product, but in the real world, business almost always mandates what the
product is, and in Nokia's case, the business decision was made years ago and
it is not something they can pivot on overnight like your typical Sillicon
Valley startup.

~~~
bad_user
Well, yes, I don't think it's feasible for Nokia either, because of the costs
involved and because of politics.

However, all of us here that are familiar with the landscape and with
Microsoft's history thought this was a bad idea from the beginning. A lot of
people freaking told them so. This is especially infuriating since their N9
was a success, limited only by Nokia's decision to discontinue it from the
start, with many reviewers calling it "one of the most fascinating phones of
the last few years".

And Nokia is not a startup, but a big company that should have the resources
to branch out a little and test the water with an Android phone. That's how
smart companies are doing it - they are A/B testing competing solutions. Take
a look at Google - that's still working on Chrome OS, in spite of Android
being a success.

And I get that Nokia wanted to focus on fewer products, to preserve resources,
however they've gone to the extremes, throwing away years of hard work and
even consumer goodwill, adopting an operating system that they don't and will
never control - at least with Android, if anything had gone wrong with the
Google partnership, they could have forked it, just like Amazon did.

~~~
se85
_However, all of us here that are familiar with the landscape and with
Microsoft's history thought this was a bad idea from the beginning._

And I'm not? Talk about judging someone without knowing anything about them,
wow! When did I say that the Microsoft idea was a good idea? It wasn't.

"And Nokia is not a startup, but a big company that should have the resources
to branch out a little and test the water with an Android phone."

I never said or implied Nokia was a startup either? Nokia is a big company
with big problems without the resources to branch out a little and test the
water with anything, and this will probably be their downfall. That was the
whole point behind my previous post!

 _That's how smart companies are doing it - they are A/B testing competing
solutions. Take a look at Google - that's still working on Chrome OS, in spite
of Android being a success._

I'm not even sure if your talking to me now?

 _And I get that Nokia wanted to focus on fewer products, to preserve
resources, however they've gone to the extremes, throwing away years of hard
work and even consumer goodwill, adopting an operating system that they don't
and will never control_

I completely agree?

 _at least with Android, if anything had gone wrong with the Google
partnership, they could have forked it, just like Amazon did._

Yeah, but they had Meego back then, and the Android platform was unproven, so
tell me why they should have chosen Android over Meego again?

Actually, I have a better idea, don't bother, I'm not interested in talking
about "what if's" only "what now's".

