Nokia Confirms Microsoft Partnership, New Leadership Team

They're mad.<p>Firstly, tying one company struggling to keep afloat to another struggling to take off (in this domain at least) is hardly the obvious ideal strategy.<p>Secondly, they're about to go onto what, their <i>fourth</i> platform strategy without large-scale wider support? And they expect to retain developer support and internal morale?<p>Thirdly, coming so soon after the news that Dalvik's porting to their previous preferred platform looked to enable broad compatibility with one of the major software bases to their platform, what's the point in this - they're moving to largely unsupported platform that's less compatible with alternatives than where they were.<p>This feels like the move of a new top dog who doesn't fully understand the situation but wants to be seen to be doing something, and so has called his old friends. Bad, bad, bad idea.

Ah yes, the old Palm strategy. Once you've let your internal OS completely stagnate, ship Windows Mobile on your phones.

Is it funny that I now think that HP buying Palm was the best business moves made last year?<p>I one fell swoop HP got exclusive rights to a legit smartphone platform where they wouldn't be beholden to any other company. No longer would HP be reliant on Microsoft in mobile.<p>Now, Nokia is going the opposite direction. Sure, Nokia has some important assets to leverage in this partnership. But make no mistake, this is a deal with the devil.<p>I wonder what this means for Qt?

Well, I suppose you don't always do the smartest thing when you're standing on a burning platform.

&#62; "There are other mobile ecosystems. We will disrupt them. There will be challenges. We will overcome them. Success requires speed. We will be swift. Together, we see the opportunity, and we have the will, the resources and the drive to succeed."<p>This is my main problem with this deal: both parties are hoping that by combining they will achieve something totally uncharacteristic of both of them individually. Neither MS or Nokia have been fast at anything for the last 10 years. Are they really going to suddenly be nimble together?<p>(I guess I'm just spelling out the "two drowning people tied together" analogy).

Bye bye maemo ,meego and qt.<p>You could see that coming from a CEO that comes from MS, Nokia is desperate to not lose their phone position and MS desperate to losing the new desktop as all paradigms sift, losing OS control and people using Office(there was a time everybody used Wordperfect, people started using word as it was ready for windows before Wordperfect).<p>MS could design phones this way to compete with Apple, and Nokia could use the MS experience in OS.<p>I don't think is a good idea to partner with MS, companies that do tend to be screwed sooner or later, MS always winning.<p>Nokia reminds me more and more of SGI,I remember when MS windows NT was their salvation, I wish I'm wrong.

<i>It’s like taking the two guys who finished second and third in a 100-yard dash and tying their legs together and asking for a rematch, believing that now they’ll run faster.</i><p><a href="http://www.fakesteve.net/2008/02/ballmer-im-completely-out-of-ideas.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.fakesteve.net/2008/02/ballmer-im-completely-out-o...</a>

Take a moment to think about how low the morale at Nokia is right now.

Well... you could see that coming, I suppose.<p>If Nokia doesn't get a chapter in future updates to "X years of high tech marketing disasters", I'll be disappointed. Jumping onto a sinking platform from a burning one isn't a big improvement.<p>With Android, they would have had a lot more freedom and, most likely, some more leverage in terms of innovating and differentiating themselves.

I'm trying to work out which of Wikipedia's list of cognitive biases (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases</a>) best describes a CEO abandoning the majority of his company's intellectual property in favour of a partnership with his ex-employer.

Nokia signs a suicide pact with Microsoft? Desperate times lead to desperate measures, but I don't think Nokia jumped from the platform here, instead they have decided to huddle in a corner with MS. This will be the death of both. I am resigning my Nokia Ambassadorship as I type. Of all the players it could team up with this is probably the worst. MS like to control the platform, but they do a very poor job of it (unlike Apple). Nokia would have been far better off by making a deeper commitment with Intel. It is a sad day, the end of an age.

Windows Phone 7 is a solid result for a first iteration product; although I see a lot of negative sentiment here (not sure how many have used it). It is missing some features but I am pretty sure they are being worked upon right now (considering the platform is so critical for Microsoft).<p>Here is what it has going for it:<p>1. Ease of development - Writing WP7 apps with Visual Studio is very easy; probably easier than any other platform.<p>2. Games! - The most downloaded apps have always been games. WP7 is a solid platform to write games and MS will _eventually_ bring in their considerable clout in XBox/PC.<p>3. "Enterprise" Apps - are still unexplored territory. WP7 is the first platform where the countless in-house Windows teams can put out something in languages they already know.<p>And finally the Nokia deal is a breakthrough for MS. Outside the US, Nokia has an exceptional market presence. Around where I live (Bangalore), there are 3 Nokia exclusive shops and all of them are going to showcase their new WP7 phones soon. With a good enough product, you can make up for everything else with marketing.<p>As for Nokia, they now will a product I might consider buying at some point.

I can't help but feel this was all arranged, with or without the full knowledge of the Nokia board, when Elop moved over.<p>It's a little sad for me, personally. I can't say with confidence that this isn't a good move for Nokia among the general populace but I've, finally, given up on them.<p>Goodbye. We'll always have the 2110 and the summer of 1994!

A sinking ship and burning platform, what could possibly go wrong?

My prediction FWIW: more lawsuits. This diagram is about to get some more lines- <a href="http://infobeautiful2.s3.amazonaws.com/whos_suing_whom.png" rel="nofollow">http://infobeautiful2.s3.amazonaws.com/whos_suing_whom.png</a>

Not so smart move for Nokia, but this move could be good for WP7. With Nokia MS could get some market share. But for Nokia it's dumb. They are betting on not so feature rich platform with very small market share, with small (comparing to competitors) number of third party applications. And what it worst this is closed platform controlled by other company.<p>Why not fork Android?

Before: At least some kind of vision, build around Qt and multiple platforms After: A little bit of dying Symbian, some open source development around Meego, some Windows phones in distant future<p>Guess this won't help in selling those Symbian E7 phones to companies.<p>I have a feeling that Vanjoki knew what was coming and gave his peeing statement in order to have his opinion on the record.

This is the definitive proof that leaving Nokia back in 2008—when they pretty much killed Maemo—was the best decision I ever made.<p>They've made two major platform shifts in just a few years. From Maemo to MeeGo and now from MeeGo to Windows Phone. Not something that inspires confidence in the company or attracts talented developers...

I hope Nokia and Microsoft are not joining forces like two drowning men, each trying to use the other for support.<p>I was hoping to see an Android phone made by Nokia.

So... Anyone wants to bet that Elop will be back to Microsoft (or something Microsoft controls) in less than five years?

Has partnering with Microsoft ever worked out well for a failing tech company? I can think of a few examples where it has failed spectacularly.

Wouldn't Android a better choice than Windows Phone?

<i>"Nokia Maps will become core to Microsoft’s mapping services"</i><p>Does this mean that Bing Maps is getting axed?

Well, as they say, a quick death is better than a slow, painful death..

I was recently hunting for a new phone. I have a plan with my mobile company where I get a new phone (any that I want) for approx. $1.99.. I needed a new phone right away since I accidentally dropped my old phone and it broke, and it was just a right time to get a new one for $1.99...<p>Anyway, there was a waiting period for iPhone 4 and HTC Desire HD (obviously they're popular), and I needed phone right now and I saw a Samsung Omnia 7.. and thought what the hell, just give me the phone - I only use it for talking (a lot) and occasional sms and email...<p>I am really surprised how WP7 is good - it lacks polish, little details, thought lots of them, but it's pretty much all there.. if they focus on those details and pimp up a marketplace a bit and let more countries in, I'm very optimistic about it.

The line in the announcement about pushing these devices into new pricepoints actually gives me some hope for the marriage. IMO, the next phase of the smartphone race will not be about having the hottest high-end smartphone - I think the winner will be the one that can make a smartphone platform pervasive on entry-level phones.<p>If Nokia and MS get WP7 on every entry level Nokia, they might be able to disrupt the high end players and bring quality to the low end that Chinese competition will haage trouble matching.

Maybe Nokia is going to make ARM laptops running Windows 8. A laptop with Windows and seriously great battery life could easily be a hit, especially if they get it out before Apple makes an ARM MacBook.<p>The existing PC manufacturers are all pwned by Intel, so there is room for someone new. (And probably for a startup trying to become the Dell of WARM, for that matter). Note also that both the WARM announcement and this one are big screw-yous to Intel.

Nokia still makes most of its money with dumbphones. You know, feature phones that are good at telephony and texting but not much else. Many people still heavily use these, especially in poorer countries. Nokia never really had a widely successful smartphone.<p>So partnering with Microsoft for smartphones doesn't look like a bad idea to me. They certainly know how to build hardware, even at large scale, and Microsoft will supply the software.

From the article:<p><i>"To support the planned new partnership with Microsoft, Smart Devices will be responsible for creating a winning Windows Phone portfolio."</i><p>Ahh... did that Elop guy forget which team he was batting for? Does Balmer still sign his pay-cheques?<p>If I was a Nokia person and got told that now whether Windows Phone was successful or not was my fault, I'd show them where they could put their phones....<p>Are they victims of Stockholm Syndrome or what?

This is kind of a bummer. I was hoping to see an N9 with Meego, and I don't think that's going to happen anymore.

Here is a pretty good summary of all of this (And what Nokia is about to do in the near future): <a href="http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=204353" rel="nofollow">http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=204353</a>

"As of April 1, Nokia will also boast a new company structure"<p>I am not sure what to read from that.

This will be interesting in terms of hardware. Windows Phone 7 has some steep system requirements. Will Nokia's existing phones even be able to accommodate it?

is it not a slight conflict of interest when former MSFT exec who just became NOK CEO makes a strategic partnership with his former company?

from burning platform to slowly sinking ship. awesome!

its a right decision - MS needs Nokia and mobile sucess as much as Nokia needs MS soft,<p>both sides are ready to contribute greatly to increase the tablet market share,<p>hint - creating and editing Excel files and Word files by mobile phones in the future

If I were CEO of Nokia, here's what I'd do. I'd go to Apple and license iOS. Now is the perfect time, and Nokia missed a critical opportunity by not doing so.<p>I know, "apple doesn't license their OS dummy!". But think about this:<p>1. Android is selling more phones right now.<p>2. Apple is unable to manufacture enough phones, and has admitted in conference calls that they have lost sales for this reason.<p>3. Nokia going to MSFT (with an ex-MFST exec as their CEO) is an obvious move... Apple was surely aware of this alternative, and killing Phone 7 in the crib is in Apple's interest. So, "keep your enemy closer", in a sense.<p>4. The terms would be sufficient for Apple. (EG: Apple wants platform dominance, and profit on its hardware, not exclusivity.)<p>5. Nokia probably could have gotten an exclusive for 4-5 years, so that the only suppliers of iPhones would be Apple and Nokia for that period. This benefits both- less distraction for Apple, and Nokia doesn't have to worry about being commoditized like they do with MSFT, which would never grant such an exclusivity period.<p>Why wouldn't Apple agree to this? Here's the objections, and why I think they don't apply:<p>1. Apple wants control over their OS. Well, this they would get. Apple would dictate to nokia the specs of the hardware, nokia would build it. They would have to cooperate on addtional features (like a second screen that noikia might want to ad, or whatever.) Apple would still be in the drivers seat for the OS like Microsoft is here.<p>2. Apple wants all the money. This isn't really true. Steve Jobs offered to license Mac OS X to the One Laptop Per Child project for free. Apple would do financial terms with Nokia, probably competitive to MSFT. Apple wants the platform dominance and the consequent %30 of appstore sales more than they want to make $300 on every phone sold. (We'll see this from apple soon with a "feature iphone")<p>3. Apple doesn't want Nokia taking away sales of iPhones. There might be some risk of this, but nokia can't compete with iphones now hardware wise, and apple's more interested in platform dominance than squeezing every penny out of the phone market. Most nokia phones right now are sold to people who chose them over the iphone for various reasons, probably having to do with not having any taste, or more seriously, nokias distribution and manufacturing capacity.<p>So long as the iPhone isn't threatened, and it wouldn't be by nokia, and the OS is respected, Apple would be happy to have another major manufacturer increasing iPhone market share.<p>In Apple's DNA are two drives:<p>1. To never again be in a situation where someone can cut off their air supply like Microsoft did.<p>2. To always produce a high quality product.<p>3. There is no three.<p>Apple doesn't care about being the most profitable, or having absolute control Everything apple does is really related to 1 &#38; 2. People often like to attribute other drives to Apple because it serves their interests to do so, but if you listen to what Apple's executives say and look at how the act, these are the two drives.<p>Apple licensing iOS to nokia under terms similar to the MSFT deal supports both of these drives and doesn't undermine either. (if Nokia started cutting off apple's air supply, Apple would simply not renew the agreement.)<p>I believe the reason this deal happened with Microsoft is that Elop is an ex-MSFTie. In my experience, people who spend large parts of their career at MSFT start seeing things completely in terms of MSFT's dominance, and I suspect this still happens even though MSFT is no longer dominant.<p>The Nokia board screwed the pooch, as they say.

poor nokia is going the way of the dodo (and zune, bing, you get the picture)