This is not the first time Nokia has done something like this. It released a
Meego version of the N9, its long-in-development Symbian successor, before
immediately abandoning the platform and switching to Windows Phone.
1: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/02/nokia-to-release-an-a...
The latest Android look and feel is not so different from Windows Phone either, once you actually get into the app. You could imagine a "Windows Phone" homescreen skin with Android Apps behind it, and it would be really quite a decent merger of the two environments, graphically speaking.
If they throw a bit of money around to encourage developers to undertake the (hopefully) relatively simple task of porting from stock Android, it's not impossible that they manage to get a pretty decent App Store together, which would solve the app problem for the otherwise fantastic Nokia hardware that they have been making these last few years.
Anyway, there's a lot of conditionals in the stuff that I've just written, none of it may come to pass, I'm just saying that it would be unwise to dismiss this effort without at least waiting a bit to see how it pans out.
http://developer.nokia.com/resources/library/nokia-x-ui/ux-c...
Except, unless I'm mistaken, MS doesn't actually own Nokia yet.
"On 2 September 2013, Microsoft announced its intent to purchase Nokia's mobile phone business unit" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia
The rules governing mergers actually prohibit Microsoft and Nokia from strategizing that kind of thing together until the merger is complete.
So is this REALLY Android if you need to port your applications to run on it? How much of what makes an Android phone Android is AOSP and how much is the Google services that sit on top of it?
The number of app on Windows Phone is no longer a problem. There are more than 240,000 Windows Phone apps as we speak.
"While Android is open, it's more of a "look but don't touch" kind of open. You're allowed to contribute to Android and allowed to use it for little hobbies, but in nearly every area, the deck is stacked against anyone trying to use Android without Google's blessing. The second you try to take Android and do something that Google doesn't approve of, it will bring the world crashing down upon you."
And his colleague wrote an article titled: "Neither Microsoft, Nokia, nor anyone else should fork Android. It’s unforkable."
So they'd look a bit silly writing about this in any other way.
Maybe it will get canned, but then before today I would have said that it was only for internal purposes, so scare Microsoft into buying them. Turns out I was wrong, and they went public with it.
As log as there's an easy way for end users to put it on it shouldn't be such a big deal though.
What I suspect they are attempting to do is get back into the low budget phone market which they used to rule before they stupidly gave it up voluntarily and the only reason they are using Android is because it's the only one suitable for that hardware however this is not the old low end market they used to know.
Before it used to be acceptable to have only a few crap apps for phones but now even the low budget phones have access to the play store. I wonder if they will make it with this self inflicted handicap.
My guess is that they are aiming at lower end of market where the price is important, and betting on developers to port their apps. Which could actually happen if porting is not a big issue.
OTOH, Google is putting more and more stuff in closed source part of OS, so the platforms will inevitably diverge. It might be a bit late for Nokia to do this... we'll see.
Also, N9 was an internally developed OS that was late, and Nokia was suffering. Axing something that is eating massive resources for an external vendor isn't in any way similar to Nokia introducing a low-cost alternative to their existing high end offerings.
Nokia announced they were abandoning Symbian/MeeGo for Windows Phone BEFORE announcing and releasing the N9.
The problem is that it's another iphone lookalike.
I WANT A DAMN KEYBOARD!
Why can't we get one, just ONE, good Android device with a hardware keyboard?
What the hell? Are you really that addicted to your phone you can't put it away for 2 hours to pay attention to a class you are paying hundreds of dollars to attend? If anything it is incredibly rude to the professor.
I'm old and cranky.
I still use my N86 for everyday use.
Of course on tablets I have either a BT keyboard or a keyboard dock.
I could write on both my Palm and my Sony Ericsson P-800 with my eyes closed. Graffiti and whatever-SE-had were excellent options to physical keyboards.
How do you install Google Play on a non-google certified phone? e.g. CM? (honest question - iPhone user here planning to jump ship)
A few questions.
How will Microsoft not be able to develop Mobile Office for Android?
How are Microsoft going to be able to maintain two mobile OSs?
Are Nokia going to see this through? I think it is a smart play, if they go after it whole-heartedly like Amazon and provide a decent amount of differentiation. One could easily see Samsung going this route.
You can already get office 365 for iOS. Not sure about android but it's logical.
This appears to be the budget/developing world side of things. I'd prefer to see WinPhone on low end devices to be honest - it's really good even on low spec handsets.
I see this as that much marketed "devices and services offering" they are always going on about. They're making a killing from Azure etc and Windows Live/outlook.com is the most mature and featureful cloud thing. They're actually shit hot these days.
I still prefer my old fashioned Unix way of life though as I don't want to become a paid up ecosystem slave.
Easily. My first thought on seeing the specs on those devices is that they are trying to position the Android offering as the cheap option: something for peopel who can't afford a proper phone. Want Office and the other big boy's toys? Then buy one of our Windows based devices instead.
> How are Microsoft going to be able to maintain two mobile OSs?
They already do: while it looks like the Symbian based OS is officially dead, as are other alternatives like meego, "feature phones" from Nokia (such as the Asha range) are still being released based around the old S40 OS. Perhaps they are looking to retire this and see Android as an inexpensive way forward, that way someone else is developing the core OS and they just need to provide drivers and device specific tweaks (and an app store & such if not licensing Google's parts). There is certainly a project out there working on smoothly running apps targeting the S40 on Linux based devices (IIRC not funcded by Nokia, but the existence of the project indicatesit is possible) which would smooth the replacement.
They have to have a cheaper alternative to the WP devices unless they can release a WP device that can compete price-wise in those markets without diminishing the appearance of the more expensive kit or they lose the "chep-nokia-to-expensive-nokia upgrade path: people with another cheap Andoird device won't have any Nokia brand loyalty so they would be competing entirely directly with high-end Android and iOS devices in that instance and they need something to try make the move to WP more attractive than a move to iOS at that point because the public perception of WP8 is far behind that of Apple (and depending on who you talk to, high-end Android).
> Are Nokia going to see this through?
That is the big question, though the answer probably doesn't really matter to smartphone users. If my guesses about the positioning thing and S40 replacement are right then they'll need to keep it going a while at least, but with the other competition around in the Android market it'll only ever fool the stupid anyway. And from the point of view of "feature phones", that is business as usual.
By most reporting[1], the office team has already had versions of office for iOS (and presumably Android) ready for quite some time. Their lack of release has been an internal political battle at Microsoft based on whether to postpone them until after the equivalent office apps are ready for RT. This is one of the biggest examples of decision making that people have been criticizing Microsoft for (handicapping their non-Windows business units to provide Windows a competitive advantage; which is a sensible strategy, but that seems ill-suited longterm, as those other business units like Office now eclipse Windows in revenue).
It's entirely possible that part of Nokia releasing this phone is related to that recent shift in strategy.
How are Microsoft going to be able to maintain two mobile OSs?
Nokia already has experience in managing operating systems. I don't know how much work "porting" over all the Nokia apps was to Android, but it seems like they've done it. They already went through the experience of porting many of them over from Symbian (and alas, Maemo didn't really have much in the way of Nokia apps). I don't think this is a serious issue for their engineering organization (even aside from Microsoft's much larger engineering organization that presumably could be made available).
Are Nokia going to see this through? I think it is a smart play, if they go after it whole-heartedly like Amazon and provide a decent amount of differentiation. One could easily see Samsung going this route.
I think this is a logical play from a risk perspective. The low-end is currently where all their sales are (as the mid and high end have dried up faster than their increasing Windows Phone sales have grown); and even though the low-end isn't the desirable part of the market (see every phone manufacturer other than Apple and Samsung as examples), the effort required isn't much greater than they're already doing for the Asha lines.
I think they'll have a better chance at building an ecosystem that's piggy-backed off of Android than in building their own. I still don't know that this is a great long-term play, but it could be.
Samsung has been alleged to be heading in this direction for ages (first reported as the reasons for them releasing Bada, and later, Tizen). The new Gear 2 watch-thing runs Tizen instead of Android (which considering it's not really a stand-alone device, is probably a good place to test the waters).
It seems like the issue with Samsung taking the plunge is how much they attribute their recent success to their own products, vs. the Google ecosystem. Once they cross that threshold, they'll ship their own OS with TouchWiz on top of it. Maybe they'll similarly have an environment that can run Android apps (it's all Linux underneath).
[1] http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft-office-on-ipad-its-alive-and-...
You're right that Nokia has a track record of supporting and developing across multiple OSs but how has this turned out for them in the long run?
Samsung are right to keep their options open but I think they should go the Amazon/Nokia route and differentiate on top of Android. Having said that Samsung is probably more than large enough and has a large enough R&D budget to pursue multiple strategies.
It's really hard to see how this plays out. I thought we'd never ever see the day when Microsoft developed for Linux or Android unless as a bridge to their own world. I thought past history, pride, lack of trust, wrong momentum, or whatever would stymie them from making the transition. If I were a beige box manufacturer I would be extremely concerned that the Microsoft may move on from phones and tablets to laptops or even PCs, now that hell has frozen over you never know what they might do.
I'm interested in how they apparently do this - especially as the Linux development process is open and MS' is secret.
As it was, if they decided to try patent trolling, chances are they'd get crushed by google, Red Hat, even Oracle...
I still can't believe that decision makers actually believe that customers want that. Sure, it makes for great bullet points on the packaging, but most consumer in the lower segment just want something that is familiar to all the other stuff they have. Things you will never hear an Android user say: "That Samsung Whatever Cloud App is really useful.", "That second App Store of my carrier is full with great Apps.", and "I wish those buttons were even more different from my old Android phone".
Those users don't go into the shop thinking "I want stock Android" because they have no idea what that would even be. Rather they go by a trusted brand and the availability of well-known apps and games. If the price is right, Nokia's unAndroid may actually serve this market quite well.
I am amazed by the negativity around this announcement when the reality is Nokia should have been doing this from the beginning, but this is certainly going to make the low end market in the EU very interesting.
"It was great that all the directions about how to do stuff, that I found on the internet, didn't apply to my phone"
"I enjoyed having stock features removed from my phone so my carrier could charge me for them"
So the problem is boils down to Samsung/Nokia/... not realizing that they are not very good at building mobile phone software. That's probably also a hard sell internally.
When all products look and feel the same way, competitors can only compete on price, at which point price wars lead to smaller profits for everyone.
Producers will always prefer selling ugly, profitable luxury products than standardised, razor-thin-margin commodities.
Looks rather poor. 800x480px on a 5-inch screen would be painful.
It was less pleasant when I dropped it a foot and a half onto a carpeted floor and the screen cracked irreparably.
Maybe the idea is to recapture that market they used to dominate, of low-cost, robust phones with the very basics. (And snake.) Nowadays, of course, the 'very basics' includes web, email and suchlike. But not everybody wants the latest fad phone-game; they want their phones to, shock horror, communicate with people. Maybe they'll find a market that would otherwise go to the most rock-bottom terrible android handsets; pretty sure it'll be a better product than those.
Maybe they'll fail. Given it's where they excelled in the past, though, you can't blame them for trying.
Only Samsung and chinese companies are cornering that market, which was formerly Nokias'.
If Microsoft ever does applications for Linux it means I've won.
Do you see RMS's point now?
This could end up being much larger than just a couple phones.
They're thinking that they'll probably bundle them for free with carriers in the 3rd world. I live in the 3rd world and the only "free" Android phones I can get with my U$ 20 contract are a Huawei crapphone, or Samsung Mini (the awful 1st version), both with Android 2.3. The non-Android alternatives are Nokia Ashas or other featurephones.
I'm pretty sure Nokia will be able to compete with the likes of the Huawei Ascend.
Nokia failed to make the leap to smartphones though. I still believe they were the only company capable of competing with the iPhone by delivering a hardware/software combo, but sadly failed to do so.
At least that's what Ars Technica has been telling us for the last months.
</sarcasm>
Seriously, Asha or X device from Nokia with Firefox OS would make more sense than this.
How many OSs does Nokia have now? 4 or 5?
Android owned by Google and the biggest competitor of Microsoft. Despite of having nice operating system like Windows mobile, they are trying Android ! This gives good sign of co-operation between giants.
Share your thoughts !
By making any success with its Android phones, Microsoft can achieve two goals:
- further fragment the Android platform making it more difficult for users to buy devices and for developers to support the various devices and
- benefit from Android's strong market position instead of only trying to create market for Windows phones in places where it doesn't fit
They've identified the greatest flaw in Android ecosystem and they're exploiting it in an attempt to make their own offering more attractive in the long run.
It seems to me that they might confuse themselves and their own customers more than anyone else with that convoluted strategy.
They identified Android's greatest flaw and swiftly added it to their own ecosystem.
http://thenextweb.com/gadgets/2014/02/24/nokia-unveils-nokia...
This so reminds me of Microsoft's J++.
It looks like the "three APIs" are not Android APIs, but rather Google Play Services APIs. Specifically push notifications, maps, and in-app payments.
it appears they don't even have what could be called strategy. for years now, they've been fucking around, burning money and talent like crazy.
the only thing nokia-microsoft should do is leverage windows phone's potential. and there's so much of it. (i'm saying this as an apple user). all the money for all this bullshit they are doing/have done could have been well invested in fleshing out their ecosystem (and i don't mean "pay developers for ports"). e.g they do have so bloody many customers who'd love mobile devices with the ms office suite. there, right there is you focus point. but no, they delay their mobile office because of internal fist fights. useless bastards management.
for god's sake, these things make me want to storm into board meetings, jump on the table and just scream at their stupidity and kicking heads off shoulders like bruce lee.
man...
Given that Windows Phones (mobile devices with the MS office suite) have been on the market for 3 years and not really taken off, I'd wager your theory isn't really true. Clearly having MS Office is not enough to sway many people.
If it's the former, I will guffaw loudly in the direction of Microsoft!
The sad thing is Android is essentially a dead platform at this point because Google recognise investment in the core system is helping their enemies, and they hold a veto over what counts as a fork and what doesn't. The only thing that can save Android would be Google letting go completely, which is simply not in their interests.
Still trying to grasp if it is just a parody or it is said seriously
1) The device does well: Nokia makes some money.
2) The device flops: Nokia can lay to rest the common criticism that they should have gone with Android. They can say, "See? We did Android. It went nowhere."
Don't blame the lack of a Play store, because remember, they were in discussions with Google and could not reach an agreement. I'm convinced it's because of Google's requirement that "all your location data are belong to us" [1] which would directly undercut Nokia's own location services. Because of Google's all-or-nothing stance, that took Google mobile services completely off Nokia's table.
Also, in the unlikely case that it does well, I wouldn't be too surprised if MS lets it live post-acquisition. After all, it's using their services, and these days there's probably more money to be made there than in selling software.
1. http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/02/new-android-oem-licen... - "Google's Network Location Provider must not only be included, but set as the default network location provider; this is no doubt the clause that triggered a lawsuit from rival location company Skyhook."
But now I think there are two other possibilities. Not high probability, but possible:
1. Satya Nadella thinks differently about Windows Phone, and Microsoft embraces an Android-based product, much in the way that Amazon has. Not because Windows Phone is a turkey, but because Windows Phone is actually quite similar to Android technologically, and it makes sense to create applications that run on both, equally well, with equal features, in order to help Microsoft products penetrate the mobile market faster. The Nokia product becomes the most efficient way for Windows users to get a Microsoft app suite on an Android device, but any Android user will have access to the same app suite. Maybe Windows Phone prospers. Maybe not. But Microsoft wins either way.
2. Microsoft backs out of the Nokia deal. Satya Nadella thinks Ballmer was high when he bought a troubled OEM, including factories that make Series 30 handsets, especially now that Google got rid of Motorola. So all the lawyers that are not worrying about those Apache license patent clause issues are worrying about how to back out of the deal while minimizing penalty obligations. This would be a momentary embarassment, with many years of serenity as a reward.
Microsoft intended to handle Android as a non-primary platform. I'm curious if those apps are going to be available on the Google Play Store as well (i hope so).
With this move, they should have update apps on the Android platform.
Also, i'm curious if developers have to change their Android APP UI to fit the new UI from Nokia (could be dangerous for Nokia).
Next, Android users all have a gmail account, now they need to switch to Outlook ? Not exactly user-friendly. Most developers have to change their Authentication also on their app.
Another route is dual booting but I think it does more harm than good.
Edit: Oh, and the interface is awful. The sensible thing would have been to use Android as inspiration to redesign Metro to be less ugly and nonfunctional, not to try and port Metro to Android...
The advantage that Nokia has is a fundamental B2B ethos. It is a commonality with Microsoft. Their chief rivals, Google and Apple don't have a partnering mindset. Nokia gets Skype and Office. They have a long history of maps.
This makes sense. In the long term going with an Android fork has nothing but upside for a company with Nokia's chops and culture.
As of this post from Nokia http://conversations.nokia.com/2014/02/24/nokia-x-family/
I think they still allow other 3rd-party sources for downloading the apps and there are still more Android based phones to come.
Personally, I doubt getting Play Store on it would be as simple as sideloading (sideloading itself isn't much different from what other app stores do) because of Google's Play Services.
Hopefully root (or a ROM, if necessary) could help with that.
I'm guessing Microsoft did not want to put their OS on a device that won't have top performance as well.
It's going to take a better phone than that to turn that ship around.