Re: Fingers crossed.
You mean a high ranking, well paid job at Microsoft - just like the one he had?
Let me get this straight:
1. Elop destroys Nokia.
2. Some shit to do with short selling, patents, or open source.
1025 posts • joined 16 May 2011
Nokia's actions between 2007 and 2010 amounted to self-defilement. For example, the premium priced N97 in 2009 had the same cheap hardware as the mid-priced 5800 from 2008. This was jaw-droppingly arrogant and suggested Nokia thought their customers were fools.
They had the time and the money to either tart up Symbian and get Maemo up to speed. They could have had the N9 and the later versions of Symbian out by 2010, certainly. They didn't. Customers and developers moved on.
Fact: Microsoft have lots of money. They are not a rock but a really watertight boat.
Fact: Microsoft NEED Windows Phone to succeed. They know that a lot of general computing is going to be on smartphones now and in the future.
Fact: If Nokia die, Microsoft know that success will be a lot more difficult. Samsung and HTC are focussed on Android.
Fact: Nokia do not have the resources to sufficiently market and subsidise a new platform in the marketplace when they are up against iPhone and Android.
This is not his doing. They would be in an even worse state had they not jumped away from their own platforms. Try to imagine a world in which Nokia was relying on Symbian and MeeGo. It is a Nokia with no plan at all. At least with Windows there is something to clasp on to that will sell the world over.
All the damage was done at Nokia long before Elop arrived, which is what few want to hear. We can talk about whether Nokia should have gone with Android, but the status quo was not an option. Nokia's smartphone market share was in a tail spin at the end of 2010.
But shouldn't it be made a lot easier to write software that doesn't zap batteries? Or, to turn it around, shouldn't it be made a lot more difficult to write software that zaps batteries? If lot's of programmers fail the same tasks, then the answer is 'yes'.
And couldn't the operating system be a bit cleverer at power management?
I have had power issues with my Galaxy Note. After buying apps to track what is going on with my phone, I finally found that a stupid bug with wifi being left on made the battery use 5-6% of my battery per hour when 'asleep' rather than 0.5%. So I got another app to turn wifi off when the screen was off, which works. Although I suspect it has introduced a new bug that spontaneously reboots my phone for no apparent reason. This drives me mad.
"I suppose there's no bribery and corruption goes in the precious metals sector."
You must have missed the bit where the author said:
"At one point, working in Russia, I needed to get cheap railway prices out of the Russian railroads to make the numbers on a metals shipment add up. The only way known to do this was to make a deal with the North Koreans who had special state-set prices on said railways. Which is how I found myself inside the N. Korean embassy in Moscow handing over $10,000 in crisp notes to their KGB-style guy after the successful conclusion of the shipment."
'It's like working for a pharmaceutical company on anaesthetic drugs and then discovering that the American government is buying them to use in executions.'
Or like working in a car factory and then discovering that some people use them to run people over. Or like working for a mobile phone company and discovering that some people use the phones as a rudimentary cudgel to brain people with. Or like...
In my local area, if you want an appointment in a time frame shorter than two weeks, you have to phone up by 0830 and ask for one, then they will phone you back to tell you when the appointment is. But not if you are on a mobile. Also, you can't book face to face.
It's as if the speed you are seen is based less on medical need , but on one's ability to endure their booking system.
Read the first commenter (bojennett) on that article you referenced, who said the following on the 9th of July last year:
"The only reason it hasn't gone public yet is because Goldmann Sachs has not hyped up the investment enough so that they can make kajillions of dollars off of the IPO, leaving the rest of the folks holding the bag. Once they get that right, FB will go public, will soar on the first day, and then crash hard."
Substitute Morgan Stanley for Goldman Sachs and that basically hit the nail on the head. Indeed, most commenters thought Mr. Asay was talking complete shite.
"Had Nokia gone with Android instead, its almost certain the current Samsung share would be split evenly between them - possibly even with Nokia edging it."
Almost certain? How did you work that out? It is most bloody well not 'almost certain' to me.
"Instead we see this rounding-error 1.5% market share, with 101 reasons anyone not forced to avoids it like the plague."
The 101 reasons piece is mostly lies. (http://mynokiablog.com/2012/05/10/windows-phone-myths-debunked-the-truth/)
You have to despair when people don't understand that the whole point of exporting goods to other nations is to eventually import goods from the other nation.
What was the point in Germans lending money to Greeks to buy German cars when there was no way the Greeks could export goods of equal value to the Germans? The Germans would have been better off making the cars for their own use, but many Germans probably think all those exports 'made their economy strong'.
Yes, variable pricing sounds good, until you realise that charges have to be transparent. If people cannot understand pricing, they cannot modify their behaviour accordingly, negating the purpose of variable pricing in the first place. If a simple pricing scheme can be introduced, then maybe that will change.
The way power is priced now, the marginal cost of each extra kWh used tends to fall. If one has a standing charge of 20p per day and is charged 10p per unit, one unit for that day costs 30p, but two units costs 40p. An increase in usage of 100%, but only a 33% rise in cost. So, cutting one's power usage by a given percentage will reduce one's costs by a lower percentage.
It's just another problem for those wanting us all to be green.
Ask the people who got an N97 with an expensive 18 month contract why they hate Nokia, but steel yourself for a foul mouthed litany in reply. The real mystery is why people reflexively defend Nokia when other companies (e.g. Sony) would not come off as lightly.
The reviews of the E72 on Amazon suggest there were big software QC issues with that phone as well. It does seem that the Symbian^3 devices released in late 2010 were the first Nokia smartphones that were not terrible.
Is it not strange that we must find crack pot ideas to explain Nokia's problems, but are happy to revel in Sony's problems? Fact is, Nokia have a plan to get out of their prediciment (it may not work, but it has a good chance), but Sony don't.
The best example of 'market share not paying the bills' is Nokia, which had around 30%-40% smartphone market share in 2010, but made next to nothing out of it. Apple had lower market share but made billions. An analyst that only looks at one aspect of how well a company is doing is ignoring a lot of information.
The N97 wasn't even the best Symbian phone at the time - the Samsung Omnia HD was released at around the same time as the N97 and was streets ahead in performance. Part of Nokia's problem at the time was that they would release phones with old processors and a lack of memory, presumably for penny pinching reasons. The Omnia HD had double the RAM and a better processor compared with the N97, and it worked much better. Nokia short changed Symbian as much as vice versa.
The N97 massively blew Nokia's credibility with consumers and operators. It allowed iPhone and Android to run away with it in 2010. Nobody can possibly talk about Nokia's current predicament without talking about the N97.
The point is, if he is willing to lie about having a degree in something he does not have a degree in, is there anything else he would be willing to do? Backstab colleagues to further himself? Hire a porn actress as a subcontractor then get blackmailed (hello, Mr Hurd!).
It just wouldn't occur to me to lie about something important and verifiable on a CV. I am always suspicious about those that do.
"But If I wanted a handset that was basic but tough with an easy to use UI then I naturally turn my attention to Nokia just from rep alone."
There is almost no profit in such devices. Apple makes big bucks from their premium phones. Cheap phones make no money, hence why Nokia (still) sell phones by the bucketload, but make no profit.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019