Stephen Elop explains why Nokia didn't choose Android

R

RoBoGhOsT

Perambulating
Skilled
A question that frequently arises when it comes to Nokia is why Nokia didnt go ahead with Android and choose Windows Phone to replace its Symbian OS. Now Stephen Elop has given the reason behind that decision.



The Guardian reports that Elop told journalists that he doesn't regret not choosing Android for Nokia's phones after Symbian.
"I'm very happy with the decision we made," he said. "What we were worried about a couple of years ago was the very high risk that one hardware manufacturer could come to dominate Android. We had a suspicion of who it might be, because of the resources available, the vertical integration, and we were respectful of the fact that we were quite late in making that decision. Many others were in that space already.

"Now fast forward to today and examine the Android ecosystem, and there's a lot of good devices from many different companies, but one company has essentially now become the dominant player."

"Strategically that's important for us [to be offering an alternative OS] because having a conversation with [chief executive] Ralph de la Vega at AT&T, the first step in the conversation is the recognition that we're not Apple, we're not Samsung/Android - used to be Android/Samsung, it's actually about Samsung now - we're a third alternative.​

This clearly explains the reason, as Elop is indirectly pointing towards Samsung which is the dominant player right now. Instead of offering something that is already there, they are offering an alternative which is important for them to maintain and increase market share.

Elop reckoned that Samsung might dominate Android ecosystem due to its manufacturing capabilities and other reasons, which would leave no room for other players.
 
Or to put it across in a less politically correct manner....M$ offered us more dosh than Google would :D

And M$ needs somebody to build stuff for them, having lost the mobile race. Real simple, nobody gives a sh!t about diversity or any thing.

Nokia's stock price has taken a terrible beating over the years, they needed somebody with deep pockets to keep them going. Business wise its sound. Nokia makes good stuff, it would be a pity to have them disappear.
 
BS. as @blr_p said - MS offered more cash - as they needed a stooge ODM for WP. Also, being an ex MS employee - he would have a decent share of MS shares - which could have indirectly influenced him :rolleyes:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nokia will not disappear, it's good for the customers to have a third option on OS front, iOS, Android and WP. Nokia is the dominant player in WP market and their hardware is quiet sturdy and good, whereas MS is trying it's best to release good updates which can bring the OS to the level of iOS and Android. I think if we wait for 2 years then WP will be more matured. Let's see, time will tell...
 
WP9 will be a force to compete in the market - and they will learn from their mistakes. Mostly, I feel, they will buy out Nokia - but retain the brand like Motorola and sell tighter integrated phones.
 
May try WP if the OS is mature enough :) never used any WP phones, Just used Nokia Symbian and then Android. So if WP has all the Notification system in place compared to Android and then the apps as well as the facility to transfer files via Bluetooth and File Manager then I may think about it. Till then will wait and watch.
 
What loads of crap that was.

So Nokia did not want to earn profits and wanted people to have a third option. Yeah right.
 
Nokia used to be No.1 in mobiles
MS used to be No.1 is many respective areas.
Thanks to Mr. Elop, for clarifying that they now are a 'third alternative'. Funny.
Mr. Elop - a man who possibly have capability to convert solid gold into vacuum.
 
paarkhi said:
Nokia will not disappear, it's good for the customers to have a third option on OS front, iOS, Android and WP. Nokia is the dominant player in WP market and their hardware is quiet sturdy and good, whereas MS is trying it's best to release good updates which can bring the OS to the level of iOS and Android. I think if we wait for 2 years then WP will be more matured. Let's see, time will tell...
Click to expand...

It will not, the new model is mobile now. In 5 years you carry your desktop in your pocket.

Nobody is pushing m$ out of this space, not for a long time yet.

I see Nokia creating some stiff competition in the entry & mid range sectors. Really pushing the android players to improve their wares at those price points.
 
I think Nokia did take the right decision, however i dont think they should stick their eggs in one basket.

If Nokia tomorrow introduce a android powered flagship smartphone which would rival the specs of the s4 then i would say more people than most would happily put their money on it.
Take the example of the HTC One. This was a great product however the brand isn't strong enough domestically to compete with Samsungw hich led to pretty low numbers proportionately to the quality of the device concerned. Had it been a Nokia, it would have done more numbers with the service offerings and retail outlets that nokia has in its store.
 
@vantheman5211, Technically Nokia cannot introduce an Android device till next 2-3 years as they are bound by the contract with MS and what you have said is true about the sales going skyhigh if they'd introduced something along the lines of S4.
@vivek.krishnan, yes their most of the sales profit comes from mid level Meego/Asha and S40 and little from WP...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I also feel, Nokia did the right decision to adopt WP instead of android. Although in short run, Nokia would have made more profits and faced lesser hard times if it went with Android but in the longer run it would become just like any other phone manufacturer as android space is too crowded and too easy to get in for other companies 'coz of its open nature i.e. competition from cheaper Chinese manufacturers operating on low margins and cutting corners.
Also, IMHO WP is more suited for vast majority of crowd than android (read non techie crowd). Its like iOS but unlike apple its more open (especially wp8) and available on large variety of devices suiting everyone's need/budget and Microsoft has guaranteed a minimum user experience even for lowly end devices which android seriously lacks. The sole reason, I feel for slow adoption rate for the OS is late entry to the scene causing the remark"there are no appzz or gamezzz for wp8" :p. But once that gap closes down, there's not much wrong with the OS and I don't see any reason why it can't be dominant 3rd player.
 
I'm just happy that we have 3 OSs competing against each other. We see so much more innovation and solid updates come by very quickly. If Apple has the top spot when it comes to apps, Nokia edged out with their cameras and Samsung is way ahead with their specs. Then the other 2 try to improve their product to match the offerings of the first one. It's a good cycle. :)
 
Haste said:
I also feel, Nokia did the right decision to adopt WP instead of android. Although in short run, Nokia would have made more profits and faced lesser hard times if it went with Android but in the longer run it would become just like any other phone manufacturer as android space is too crowded and too easy to get in for other companies 'coz of its open nature i.e. competition from cheaper Chinese manufacturers operating on low margins and cutting corners.
Also, IMHO WP is more suited for vast majority of crowd than android (read non techie crowd). Its like iOS but unlike apple its more open (especially wp8) and available on large variety of devices suiting everyone's need/budget and Microsoft has guaranteed a minimum user experience even for lowly end devices which android seriously lacks. The sole reason, I feel for slow adoption rate for the OS is late entry to the scene causing the remark"there are no appzz or gamezzz for wp8" :p. But once that gap closes down, there's not much wrong with the OS and I don't see any reason why it can't be dominant 3rd player.
Click to expand...

if we go back to the symbian days , nokia was known for customization with custom ROMS available for their N series phones.

and even then nokia was a leader among the techie and the non techie crowd.

while offering an alternative is good , what other disapprove of is nokia not being flexible enough to have multiple OS in their portfolio, which almost every manufacturer like LG, samsung and HTC are doing.

nokia has a good brand value in India and if they had been flexible enough , they would have been still at the top and not the "3 rd" alternative.
 
Superbad said:
if we go back to the symbian days , nokia was known for customization with custom ROMS available for their N series phones.

and even then nokia was a leader among the techie and the non techie crowd.

while offering an alternative is good , what other disapprove of is nokia not being flexible enough to have multiple OS in their portfolio, which almost every manufacturer like LG, samsung and HTC are doing.

nokia has a good brand value in India and if they had been flexible enough , they would have been still at the top and not the "3 rd" alternative.
Click to expand...

Back in those days Nokia was like what apple is today... for non techie crowd N series phones were *the thing* to get. They wouldn't bother about its other capabilities as long it had a Nokia branding with high mp camera. About ROM customization, i don't think more than 2-3% people do that even now, so it ain't a big factor for companies.
 
Back
Top