
Behind Microsoft Deal, the Specter of a Nokia Android Phone - coloneltcb
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/13/behind-microsoft-deal-the-specter-of-a-nokia-android-phone/?smid=tw-nytimesbits&seid=auto&_r=2&pagewanted=all&
======
jmspring
I didn't work in the phone division, but my impression from working at Nokia
and spending time in Finland in the early 2000s was, that like any company
producing hardware, there were efforts at producing phones for a few years
out. This included both hardware and software -- tools for some of the system
60/80 stuff was contracted out to a company no longer in existence.

So, from the stand point of future thinking, it seems perfectly reasonable
that Nokia had handsets that could run android. This is no different than
Apple making sure OS X ran on both Power and Intel architectures. Hedging
one's bets is always good.

~~~
Zigurd
Android is open enough that Nokia could likely cobble up a very decent
speculative port of AOSP plus gapps and scare the crap out of anyone not
familiar with android porting, making them think a deal was immanent. Nokia's
handsets all use recent Qualcomm chipsets, so I would not be surprised if they
demo'ed the whole product line running Android just to stampede Microsoft into
this deal.

------
GFischer
A Nokia Android phone would have been a compelling alternative if priced
correctly.

Nokia has a huge brand here in Latin America, my last 12 years' worth of
phones were Nokias and I wouldn't have switched if Nokia offered an Android
smartphone.

Too bad they didn't, it would be like Coke offering Classic Coke after
offering the New Coke for a few years!

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Coke](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Coke)

On my Android phone wish list is:

\- a phone with a camera button, that's the thing I miss the most on my
smartphone, I had a Nokia N86. (I think the Android spec forbids it?)

\- I also want a sliding Android phone - something like an Android-based
Blackberry Torch
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlackBerry_Torch_9800](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlackBerry_Torch_9800)

\- an Android Smartphone that can be operated with one hand, with physical
buttons - probably a keyboard or slider design would work, but I haven't found
a keyboard Android with a decent enough screen. Something like a Blackberry
Q10 with Android maybe.

\- all of the above with over 2 days of battery life (I think Motorola managed
that part)

\- Nokia-like build quality (my N86 is still in great shape and has a
fantastic keyboard)

Maybe if an Android vendor buys Blackberry I'll get my wish :)

~~~
jads92023jf
My samsung intercept has a physical keyboard, physical camera button and good
build quality (I've dropped it several times, a few times on hard floors).
Unfortunately, it's still a shitty phone. It's waayy too slow, doesn't have
enough RAM, and the battery life isn't great. On the other hand, I've had it
for two years now and given that I haven't been arsed to replace it yet, it's
clearly above a certain threshold of usability.

I do agree with your point. This is my first smartphone, all my previous
phones were Nokia feature phones and my experiences with those suggest if
Nokia tried to make this phone, they would've got it right.

~~~
GFischer
Yeah, something like an updated Intercept would work, I'd like it more if it
were an up-slider/pop slider, not a side-slider.

Motorola has some pretty impressive side-sliders too, but I liked my Nokia up-
sliders (Nokia 5200 and N86).

------
milhous
I wonder if this deal was staged from the beginning. Stephen Elop leaves
Microsoft to become CEO of Nokia. He can't turn things around there (and/or
may not have had any intention to do so), does his due diligence and shops the
company back to his former employer, and is back at Microsoft. Sounds a bit
too convenient, doesn't it? I know similar things happen elsewhere, but this
is all I could think about throughout this--a super easy and convenient
acquisition.

------
volandovengo
i still don't complete understand why you can't just buy a phone nowadays and
install either android or windows phone os on it.

shouldn't this be the strategy which microsoft pursues?

~~~
dangrossman
That could be a strategy for an underdog like Microsoft (in this market) to
pursue.

For everyone else, it's no surprise they don't commoditize their own products.
That'd just be throwing away money. Samsung wants to sell you the special
experiences only their S4 will provide you. Apple wants to sell you the
special experiences only an iPhone will provide you. That's how they get you
to pay a premium, and to upgrade every 2 years, where you only replace most
other items you own when they wear out or break.

Nobody wants to be just one of a dozen vendors of black bricks with a tech
spec sheet.

~~~
thedrbrian
>Nobody wants to be just one of a dozen vendors of black bricks with a tech
spec sheet.

That sounds a lot like the current PC industry.

~~~
dangrossman
It is; that's a commoditized market, which is why margins are thin on consumer
PC sales.

~~~
sliverstorm
I think most PC companies would give their left foot to have margins large
enough to describe as "thin"

------
mda
"Getting Android to run on Nokia’s hardware was not a Herculean engineering
effort, according to the people familiar with the project."

No shit, Sherlock...

~~~
sliverstorm
Hey, you never know. What if Nokia never put in a MMU in their phones?

~~~
mortehu
They had at least two phones (N9 and N900) running Linux already, though.

------
Apocryphon
What if Motorola created non-Android phones?

~~~
corresation
They should have. It really made no sense when they decided to bet the farm on
Android, just as it didn't make sense for Nokia to bet the farm on Windows
Phone. Well, those decisions make sense from the perspective of eventual
acquisitions I suppose.

Though there is a bit more justification for skipping a platform like Windows
Phone, as it was one where Microsoft dictated the hardware -- the processor,
GPU, screen, etc. So there could be a lot of engineering hassle with something
like that -- you pretty much had to engineer hardware specifically for Windows
Phone -- versus Android where Nokia really could easily adapt it to pretty any
handset they have.

And I doubt Microsoft's concern was Nokia putting Android on some low end
joke. They knew if the day came when a Lumia XXXX was available with either
Android or Windows Phone, it may quickly yield some very poor press for the
platform.

~~~
Steko
It made no sense for Motorola to bet on Android? What other options were
carriers interested in buying that Motorola could have shipped?

"didn't make sense for Nokia to bet the farm on Windows Phone"

Who else was lining up to write Nokia billion dollar checks?

~~~
corresation
We're talking abstractly about platforms, excluding externals like payola.

Motorola went all in on Android back in late-2008, which was incredible as the
OS had close to no marketshare and was rather a PoS at the time. As primarily
a maker of hardware, it made no sense that Motorola would cut out the
_possibility_ that Microsoft (or others) would come up with something
compelling, but that's what they did.

Samsung, HTC and others were poised to be there if Windows Phone succeeded. It
didn't and likely won't, but they didn't cut themselves out.

Just to respond to the other chap who responded to you -- I have never, ever
bought the "just another Android maker" argument. It doesn't make sense, and
has never been the case in the market. Each vendor tries to get your purchase
through their own compelling merits, and the platform really does become a
commodity, but in a _good_ way for them. That is why Nokia and their
hardware/imaging focus could likely have done gangbusters with Android.

~~~
Steko
"Motorola went all in on Android back in late-2008, which was incredible as
the OS had close to no marketshare and was rather a PoS at the time. "

Right but in hindsight Android is a huge success so that was the right move.

"made no sense that Motorola would cut out the possibility that Microsoft (or
others) would come up with something compelling"

Did they?

 _Sanjay explains that his company is willing to work with Microsoft on
developing a handset based around its new OS, so long as the offering is
"compelling." He notes that the first call he received upon becoming co-CEO
and handset division chief back in 2008 was from none other than Steve
Ballmer, but Microsoft's failure to deliver a new OS in '09 is what compelled
him to go the Android route_

[http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/06/motorola-is-open-to-
devel...](http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/06/motorola-is-open-to-developing-
windows-phone-7-devices-but-on/)

~~~
pinaceae
the right move for whom? Moto got bought. android destroyed the market for
mobile OS due to its gratis nature. no mobile OS can be sold/licensed anymore,
android has destroyed the price point.

apple is building its own OS, MS needs to do the same incl. the hardware. the
rest of mobile companies are now all on android, wait for google to do the
heavy lifting, for free.

~~~
Steko
"the right move for whom? Moto got bought."

Saying the decision to go with Android is what killed Motorola is like blaming
the chef for the Titanic sinking. I mean they could have served duck that
night instead of pheasant.

------
Kiro
Lumia + Android + WP8 launcher

I use the WP8 launcher on my Galaxy S3 and nothing beats it.

~~~
andybak
I can't see anything in the Play Store called 'WP8 launcher".

There's a whole bunch of things with similar names.

Do you have a link or the exact name of the app?

~~~
Kiro
Launcher8 free is the one I'm using. Very smooth. I wish there were more
launchers with vertical and seamless home screens (like on Windows Phone).

------
joe_the_user
Well,

Serious question: was $7 Billion any of kind premium for Nokia?

