Comments on: Nokia loses mobile top spot. What does it have left?

By: h.w. LEE

h.w. LEE — Tue, 01 May 2012 05:18:00 +0000

It’s very sad to me I loved Nokia. but this company hasn’t good futures.

By: Petter Martin

Petter Martin — Mon, 30 Apr 2012 13:15:30 +0000

The new lumia series is awesome. won't be long before Nokia gets its foothold back in the mobile market. Airline Reservation System

By: dexterkuan

dexterkuan — Mon, 30 Apr 2012 03:26:18 +0000

Known for its robustness, reliability and always fitted with relevant features. But apparently, lack innovation and competitive survival. It put up a competitive fight with Samsung, but ignored indirect competitors such as its early encounters with Apple.

By: Russ

Russ — Sun, 29 Apr 2012 02:19:54 +0000

So you asked the question. What’s your answer?

What does Nokia stand for? What’s the word that they own in your mind?

Nothing comes to mind? That’s what I thought.

Elop thing a disaster…

By: boing

boing — Sat, 28 Apr 2012 19:59:55 +0000

Nokia should merge with Sony.

By: Bobbie Johnson

Bobbie Johnson — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 19:10:28 +0000

Both good points, really. It depends on whether you believe you can avoid mediocre launches and get some blockbusters along the way. Of course, the trouble is that everyone thinks they can do that — but very few (if any) manage it.

By: aepxc

aepxc — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:19:36 +0000

I’m not sure that’s true. Remember the apparent invincibility of the “Quietly Loaded” HTC as it went from record quarter to record quarter (and Samsung’s comparative irrelevance) in the Android space pre-Galaxy?

If you are a hardware differentiator in a ‘halo device’ ecosystem, you are just one mediocre launch (and/or a great competitor device) away from significant hardship. Samsung’s crown can fall at any moment. Who knows – maybe 2 years from now we’ll be singing praises to Huawei’s Nexus Ascend.

By: Nicholas

Nicholas — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 12:48:46 +0000

It is impossible not to link these problems back to the beginning, when Nokia bought EPOC and proceeded to do nothing of real interest. They had the beginnings of the NetBook in their hands. They proceeded to create the least interesting technologies that suited a broad base that got them a certain distance. Hell, UIQ was interesting because it was Symbian with style. Anybody interested in mobile had either 6820 or a SE P series.

How can one not look at the N series tablets and say that these people had a clue past putting out something marginally useful? You can witness and read the DoCoMo sagas and come out realizing that services were going to be the killer platform. It took Apple to see that a limited ecosystem with solid consumer experience services would penetrate the American market. We were the third world of mobile, caught between disinterested telecoms, and Motorola Star Tacs. This is the worlds largest consumer market! Anybody could win by creating an excellent product, but end to end integration was sorely lacking.

I’ve said it before, the only way Nokia is getting back as a world platform is to get web browser based devices into the third world as fast and as cheaply as possible. The rest of te world will catch up to seeing the mobile web as a viable platform in a few years. A script-able development platform needs to be built. Somebody can do better than Apple and particularly Android with Eclipse. Partner with freaking Adobe on a mobile HTML publishing platform! Make it easy for people to create. You’ ll even sell one to me for between my two iPhones.

Nokia always made nice devices, and never made an elegant platform. Welcome to 2012. It took you a dozen years to blow it…

By: PA

PA — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:28:35 +0000

Funnily enough, Samsung embraced Android wholeheartedly and with just hardware (which is what is needed much more right now, not software differentiation), managed to achieve what Nokia wanted to stay away from becoming – just another Android OEM. Except Samsung has far more clout, something Nokia would also have had if they had chosen to make Android handsets when they should have.

Anyone talking about ‘differentiation’ in software is essentially just trying to lock customers down to their platform, so that they do not need to innovate and compete as much in future once customers have bought into their schemes and do not have any easy way out.

I am really interested in seeing where Samsung heads after this. Do they become complacent after a while, as every company that reaches the top tends to be? Or do they continue to drive hardware with newer displays, battery, radio and form factors?

By: sean

sean — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:06:41 +0000

It stands for a company that has offloaded software development to microsoft.
It stands for a company that may attempt to broaden its offerings, (nokia music).
It stands for a company that has to deliver a quality product.