

Nokia Confirms It’s Keeping An Open Mind About Using Android In Future - amerf1
http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/08/nokia-confirms-its-keeping-an-open-mind-about-using-android-in-future-message-to-microsoft-dont-take-support-for-granted/

======
rthomas6
If Nokia is losing money by staying with Windows Phone only, what benefit do
they get from it? I'm a big Android fan, and I've always liked Nokia phones.
If Nokia made an Android phone, I would probably use it. I know I'm not alone.
In the article, Nokia says that it felt like it couldn't stand out in the
Android market, but Nokia's hardware stands out on its own. I think an Android
Nokia phone would sell like hotcakes.

~~~
ZenoArrow
"If Nokia is losing money by staying with Windows Phone only, what benefit do
they get from it?"

The current approach seems to be; 1\. Set themselves up as a big player in a
smaller market. 2\. Wait for the smaller market to grow.

In other words, they're trying to play the long game.

As for the comments about Android, the article is link-bait, pure and simple.
Being open to an idea doesn't mean you have any plans to implement it. To use
an analogous story, imagine we were colleagues and you mentioned in a
conversation that you may work for a different company before you retire, if I
was playing TechCrunch's role I'd be going to your boss and saying you were
planning to get a new job.

~~~
TheAnimus
The whole elephant in the room about the Nokia should use Android thing is
HTC.

HTC have, for a variety of reasons lost a lot of ground to Samsung.

The question I always find myself asking, is would Nokia have faired better
there?

On WP they only have to out gun HTC really, thats it. On Android, Samsung are
doing a good job carving out the high end, the mid range, and leaving the low
to no profit margin to the Chinese and nock off brigade.

Will Nokia's Microsoft gamble pay off? Who knows, Would it have been raking in
the billions if it had gone Android? Probably not, as HTC's problems show.

~~~
lawdawg
At least HTC is profitable, along with a host of other OEMs that target China,
India, and Europe. The reason that other OEMs like LG and Motorola are not
profitable (but they aren't losing anywhere as much as Nokia is) is less to do
with picking Android and more to do with the fact that they were doing very
poorly before Android came around and Android was the main reason they are
still relevant today.

As others have stated, there's nothing wrong with Nokia building out Windows
Phone phones. The issue is exclusivity, which is understandable given the $1
billion a year Microsoft is paying them. I suppose we will see which way Nokia
turns once that contract ends (whenever it does end).

------
UnoriginalGuy
Nokia's mistake was exclusivity.

We can argue all day about whether Nokia was right to jump into bed with
Windows Phone/Microsoft, but what might be a more interesting question is if
they were right to sign exclusively with Windows Phone/Microsoft.

If they had not done so they could have their current line of WP8 devices on
the market, and alongside them they could be testing the waters with an
Android device or two. Just let the market decide.

Nokia hardware with a virgin Android installation and a handful of custom
Nokia apps sounds like an appealing offering. In fact I would buy such a phone
if it were available.

A lot of manufacturers have been installing gunk-ware over Android (e.g.
Samsung TouchWiz, HTC Sense, etc) making it slow and laggy, and delaying
Android updates by between weeks and sometimes years. Virgin Android (or "the
Nexus experience") is actually a real selling point for many Android fans and
something Nokia could exploit.

Another area where traditional Android phone manufacturers have suffered is
that they simply release too many phones. This has confused consumers,
weakened their marketing, and split their efforts too widely. If Nokia
released no more than three devices per year (small, medium, and large) they
could concentrate all of their efforts (marketing and development) in a might
smaller area but get much more bang for their buck.

~~~
netcan
_Nokia hardware with a virgin Android installation and a handful of custom
Nokia apps sounds like an appealing offering._

That sounds right for any manufacturer. Somehow though, manufacturers seems to
disagree. They prefer lots of devices + lots of tweaks to the OS.

~~~
takluyver
From the manufacturers' point of view, virgin Android doesn't have anything to
tie you to their brand. They're looking at the PC market, where Dell, HP,
Lenovo etc. all have the same interface, consumers have no brand loyalty,
there's fierce competition on price, and margins are razor thin.

That's arguably good for consumers - it keeps prices down, and we can easily
mix computers from different OEMs. But the manufacturers would much rather be
like Apple, with an exclusive interface attracting loyal fans who buy products
with greater markup. They mostly suck at implementing it, but the potential
rewards are so great that they can't resist trying.

~~~
rthomas6
>From the manufacturers' point of view, virgin Android doesn't have anything
to tie you to their brand. They're looking at the PC market, where Dell, HP,
Lenovo etc. all have the same interface, consumers have no brand loyalty,
there's fierce competition on price, and margins are razor thin.

But is there anything actually useful in these software additions? It looks
like it's just skins, and maybe some clock and weather widgets. Do people
actually say, "I want to buy another HTC/Samsung phone because they have that
widget."? Manufacturers actually do add their own software onto PCs as well,
but it's all shit and bloatware. The closest to useful software from a
hardware vendor that I've seen (outside of the exception of Apple) is software
for individual components, like EVGA video cards or ASUS motherboards.

It's like the hardware manufacturers usually don't think about the actual
utility of the software they're putting on the PCs/phones, and the only point
of it is some kind of brand differentiation. Which is absurd, when you think
about it.

~~~
takluyver
I agree - our tech would work better if OEMs stuck to making hardware, ISPs
were dumb pipes, and so on. But they want users to relate to them, so they
relentlessly build portals, toolbars, widgets, and anything that might make
some sap think 'I want a Samsung' rather than 'I want an Android phone'.

My phone comes with the 'Samsung Apps' store. I've never even accepted the
Ts&Cs, but if even a few percent of users go there instead of to Google Play,
it's probably viable for them to build it.

------
manojlds
There is no reason why Nokia shouldn't do an Android phone. It is the same
case with Windows Phone, there are other OEMs. Hell, HTC8X even looks like
Nokia Lumias. How is Nokia really differentiating in WP? Hardware like camera,
touchscreens thatcan be used with gooves etc and, some software like Nokia
Maps. They can do the same with android.

~~~
perbu
Of course there are reason they shouldn't do an Android phone. Being (more or
less) exclusively WP is worth a lot when negotiating with Microsoft. Also,
having one OS instead of several makes marketing a lot easier.

(I know they still have Symbian, but AFAIK it doesn't sell significantly in
the western markets and I don't think Microsoft sees it as a threat to WP).

~~~
cpeterso
Is Nokia still selling Symbian phones? Their Series 40 feature phones are
still popular in developing markets, but they are not running the Symbian OS.

~~~
manojlds
Nokia is still selling them in the Asha series. They have been popular too, in
India, China, and elsewhere.

~~~
abrowne
AFAIK, the Asha phones run S40, not Symbian.

------
mmahemoff
Android isn't their only available gambit. Things would get real interesting
if they invested in the Firefox and/or Ubuntu mobile OSs. They are both
attractive developer platforms in need of considerable OEM support.

~~~
rplnt
They already produce phones with one OS that is not popular. Why add another?
If they want to focus on Windows phones then Android can serve as a safety
net. Ubuntu or Firefox would be just another disaster for them.

~~~
takluyver
Another minor OS would be a long shot, but as others have mentioned, going to
Android is hardly a guaranteed win either. Rather than putting all their eggs
in one basket, maybe it's worth investing in several OSes simultaneously. It
wouldn't be the first time Nokia R&D has gone out on a limb - they've
designed, and sometimes even produced, some really odd phones.

------
yread
Probably not gonna happen [http://wmpoweruser.com/nokia-categorically-denies-
android-ru...](http://wmpoweruser.com/nokia-categorically-denies-android-
rumours-looking-forward-to-double-digit-market-share/)

------
sethg
It would be perfectly logical for Nokia to have an alternative OS waiting in
the wings, in case Windows stops being useful for them, or even as an
incentive to discourage Microsoft from squeezing them too hard.

Of course, once upon a time, (Linux-based) Maemo/Meego was the OS waiting in
the wings, which they were going to migrate to after Symbian stopped being
useful to them, and look how well that worked out.

------
trimbo
Aren't they out of money? Microsoft is doing the marketing spend for them at
this point in the US, so I'm just not sure how they could afford this.

------
WestCoastJustin
I'm waiting for blackberry to come around and do the same!

------
eliben
So I gather Elop's MS options are about to vest soon :-)

