backtop


Print 58 comment(s) - last by callmeroy.. on Mar 10 at 3:43 PM


Nokia CEO Stephen Elop
"I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse."

Nokia ruffled more than a few feathers when it announced that it would be shacking up with Microsoft when it comes to smartphone operating systems. Feeling the heat from smartphone operating systems like Apple's iOS and Google's Android, Nokia is winding down its efforts with MeeGo and Symbian in order to embrace the nascent Windows Phone 7 (WP7) operating system.

Now, a new report from BusinessWeek suggests that Nokia was offered a sweet deal to go with Microsoft’s WP7 operating system over the rival Android OS. BusinessWeek says that Nokia will receive roughly $1B as a part of a 5-year deal with Microsoft.

Microsoft, of course, will also profit handsomely from its $1B investment if Nokia's WP7 offerings take off in the marketplace. Unlike with Google's freely available Android OS, Nokia will pay Microsoft a royalty fee for each WP7 handset that it sells.

“This gives Microsoft scale and allows Nokia to rip out costs,” said Colin Gillis, an analyst at BGC Partners in New York, who recommends buying Microsoft shares. “Microsoft is getting the platform boost.” 

Although $1B USD is a nice motivator to adopt WP7, Nokia's Stephen Elop claims that Nokia would have gotten lost in vast sea of me-too Android devices, and that the Microsoft partnership gives it a chance to shine. “A decision to go with Windows Phone creates a very different dynamic. Windows Phone is a challenger. It becomes a three-horse race,” said Elop according to Mobile Beat.

Nokia’s Symbian operating system has been under a constant assault from Android. Android overtook Symbian as the world’s best-selling smartphone operating system in Q4 2010 (33.3 million units versus 31 million units).



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: is this any surprise?
By carniver on 3/7/2011 7:39:07 PM , Rating: 0
You're talking out of your arse. How did you lose from not having to pay for Netscape? Windows Mobile 7 is to be a major upgrade from WM6, and an original design at the same time. Kinect is also proving to be another major innovation. If you have to say it, Google is the one destroying competition by giving Android away free.


RE: is this any surprise?
By sprockkets on 3/7/2011 7:59:18 PM , Rating: 2
free != bundling


RE: is this any surprise?
By someguy123 on 3/7/2011 9:43:30 PM , Rating: 2
I think he's talking about how android is free, not that android devices are free.


RE: is this any surprise?
By bplewis24 on 3/7/2011 10:31:30 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Google is the one destroying competition by giving Android away free.


That doesn't really make sense.

Essentially giving away Android to handset manufacturers for free encourages competition because it lessens the burdens/barriers of entry for each manufacturer/OEM.

Also, it forces handset manufacturers to compete with each other in rapidly developing new hardware and making compelling software for their devices (not always a good thing), thus speeding up the hardware turnover cycle and driving down prices faster.

Google isn't about destroying competition. Most of the markets they enter already have a major player in them.

Brandon


RE: is this any surprise?
By someguy123 on 3/8/11, Rating: -1
RE: is this any surprise?
By Taft12 on 3/8/2011 12:06:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Android being free is anti-competitive because it requires resources that very few have to make a reality.


What?? You and I have the same resources available to us that Google used and is using to build Android!

http://developer.android.com/guide/appendix/faq/li...

This is why the GPL is a good thing. Don't reinvent the wheel when you already have it sitting there right in front of you.

Operating systems are commodities now. Save your development resources for filling niches. That's the way the software world works today and we are all so much better off for it.


RE: is this any surprise?
By someguy123 on 3/8/2011 1:54:45 PM , Rating: 2
Yes it's open source but that doesn't mean you or I have the man power to produce a fully functional phone OS.

It's just insane that google gets love for this merely because it's open source. How are people going to compete with free software developed through a massive company like Google? It is the very definition of anti-competition when it comes to software, especially since they're not only developing, but also actively pushing and distributing.

If you appreciate what this does for the industry, that's another thing, but to deny that this stifles competition is ridiculous.


RE: is this any surprise?
By Landiepete on 3/8/2011 4:18:44 AM , Rating: 2
You're ignoring one of the basic realities.

Research an developement is expensive business. It takes a major investment, not only monetary, but also in time and effort to develope a cute idea into something useable. Morover, the return is unknown, and depends largely on the ability to monetize the outcome.

Google is in a position where it can constantly scan the market for things that look interesting or promising.
If they detect anything that tickles their fancy, the gigantic amount of money and resources they're sitting on allows them to develop an alternative at breakneck speed, and then 'give it away for free' to gain momentum. They do not have to worry about getting (ginger)bread on the table before a product gains the necessary traction to make it a success.
This is different to (e.g.) the strategy Microsoft has employed for many years, simply buying out small ompanies with promising tech.

Google is skewing the 'normal' supply and demand and R&D simply because they have too much money.


RE: is this any surprise?
By fishman on 3/8/2011 9:57:56 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Google is skewing the 'normal' supply and demand and R&D simply because they have too much money.


The same is true for Microsoft. Look at how much money they have dumped on the Xbox before it became profitable. And they are willing to spend many billions on Windows Phone.


RE: is this any surprise?
By someguy123 on 3/8/2011 1:56:54 PM , Rating: 3
Yet people agree with you.

Point out that google is doing the same and people will ignore reality in favor of free software.


RE: is this any surprise?
By mcnabney on 3/8/2011 9:09:52 AM , Rating: 1
Your the one talking out of your arse if you didn't know that Kinnect wasn't developed by MS. It was made by Canesta, which MS bought. MS doesn't innovate. It bullies, leverages existing monopolies, and if that doesn't work it gets out the checkbook like in the case with Nokia.


RE: is this any surprise?
By seamonkey79 on 3/8/2011 9:37:37 AM , Rating: 2
The Kinect folks shopped around for places to sell themselves to.

They were turned down by everyone except Microsoft.


RE: is this any surprise?
By mcnabney on 3/8/2011 2:53:12 PM , Rating: 1
There are only three console companies.

Sony and Nintendo already had 'equivalent' technology.

But my POINT was that MS didn't develop the tech. They saw what the competition was doing and went shopping. Which is fine, but you can hardly claim it was 'your' bright idea.


RE: is this any surprise?
By PrezWeezy on 3/8/2011 7:31:05 PM , Rating: 2
Pretty sure that Android wasn't Google's brain child either.

No big company "innovates" if we use your criteria to define it. Look at any tech company, they buy other smaller companies who have the drive to create something brand new. And those little companies have a HUGE risk in doing so. Microsoft, et al, let someone else take the big risks and then provide to them a way to grow. That's all about pleasing your shareholders. Shareholders want 0 risk. It's part of business.

Sorry, but Google ain't no better than the rest.


RE: is this any surprise?
By Smilin on 3/8/2011 10:37:29 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Your the one talking out of your arse if you didn't know that Kinnect wasn't developed by MS. It was made by Canesta, which MS bought
I think you mean Primesense. Microsoft partnered with them,and didn't buy them. Primesense had approached Apple first but was put off by their arrogance and draconian vendor rules. (in other words Apple can't do partnerships as well as Microsoft)

The primesense sensor is also but a small part of Kinect. The rest was done by collaboration between the Entertainment division and the R&D division..you know the facial recognition, gesture extration? Directional mics combined with player location recognition and facial recognition to confirm a moving mouth. Primesense didn't do that crap. MS did.

quote:
MS doesn't innovate.

Man that argument is getting tired. It's been disproven over and over again. I know the rule is that if you repeat a lie enough that it becomes truth...that doesn't work here in the face of facts. They have the largest self created patent portfolio of all their competitors. 9Billion in R&D.

quote:
It bullies, leverages existing monopolies,
Actually it doesn't leverage existing monopolies. If it did it would violate the DoJ settlement which has been complied with 110% since it came into being. Outside of IE, and WMP player what have you seen included in the OS lately? Windows Live Essentials are free, why aren't they bundled? Apple does. Security Essentials...free..not bundled. Get it?

quote:
and if that doesn't work it gets out the checkbook like in the case with Nokia.


Don't forget that partnerships are innovation too. Microsoft is good at making win-win partnerships. I know Apple fans will agree :). Other companies don't pull it off as well. (AOL, Timewarner, Novell, etc.)

Mcnabney your whole post reeks of hatred and self induced ignorance. All of the big three: MSFT, Goog, AAPL have merits and all three have done some phenominal innovation and all three have recognized merits of others and incorporated them. You know that Android, iOS, and OSX weren't home grown right? MS-Dos 1.0 wasn't either but everything else since has been.


RE: is this any surprise?
By mcnabney on 3/8/2011 2:57:56 PM , Rating: 1
I can spend $9B on whores, it doesn't mean I know anything about sex.

Microsoft is only good at extending their monopoly. Take the Xbox for instance. They had to pillage PC gaming in order to build market share. Because RIM and Apple also had Office functionality Windows Mobile had to compete on their own innovation (without monopoly leverage) and they obviously failed. In this case with Nokia, MS is trying to outright BUY market share. They aren't even giving away the OS, like Google. They are paying companies to use theirs.


RE: is this any surprise?
By Smilin on 3/9/2011 4:25:14 PM , Rating: 2
Not really much point in talking to you if you're just going to spew hyperbole.

You think the Xbox is successful today because it somehow leveraged the Windows "monopoly"? Explain good sir...I'm all ears.

"microsoft doesn't innovate" is a tired argument disproven over and over and over and over again. Yet still the irrational nutbags come out of the woodwork to repeat it.


"Google fired a shot heard 'round the world, and now a second American company has answered the call to defend the rights of the Chinese people." -- Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.)














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki