MeeGo is the child of Moblin and Maemo. It was the only mobile OS that would run on x86. Now that it's days look numbered, Intel are without a mobile platform for its Atom chips. At least until Windows 8 comes out.
This really was bad news for Intel.
Until Moorestown is more than a demo Intel really doesn't have a whole lot to bitch about. The LG GW990 never shipped so AFAIK Intel has nada on the market.
Actually, I'm guessing all the mobile OS could run on x86 but there isn't an x86 based smartphone platform yet. As far as tablets go, MeeGo and android would both run. Intel demo'd Android 2.1 on Moorestown already.
This is the same yahoo that claimed this would never happen despite everyone saying "Yeah, it's gonna happen". WTF would anyone think his analysis is worth bupkis?
The guy is an idiot if he really thinks the MS development community is miniscule. Especially in comparison to qt. No one gives a shit about symbian devs because developing for symbian always sucked. Moving to qt is better but MS has a world class dev environment.
While it's true that Intel knew about all the older phones, that isn't the way it was supposed to be working out in the future. This was a plan for both companies. Nokia would supposedly be getting a better OS, and Intel was going to sell its chips in the smartphone market.
That WAS the idea. Now, it's smashed. We MAY be seeing a MeeGo phone at some point, perhaps to fulfill a contractual obligation. But it's dead otherwise.
It was smashed when LG pulled their moorestown phone. 2010 was when Moorestown was supposedly to launch and compete with ARM. It's 2011 and not so much.
But Nokia now has no serious tablet plan. It's been pretty much agreed upon in the industry that tablets are tied to smartphones. Apple has that plan. HP has that plan. Google, to a lessor degree, has that plan, even RIM does. But Microsoft doesn't. And now that means that Nokia doesn't either.
Tablets are not necessarily tied to smartphones. Some are derived from smartphones but they don't need to be tied. Their success appears to be tied to ecosystems.
To state that MS doesn't have tablet plans is simplistic given they have both WP7 and a ARM port for Win7. MS has an ecosystem to support the XBox. Even the oft derided Zune ecosystem is of great value given that its video platform it has 17% share...ahead of sony.
So Nokia has gained access to the XBox Live games ecosystem and the Zune video ecosystem.
In any case, Nokia can continue to drive toward MeeGo and a Moorestown based MID/Tablet. Intel has to deliver a power efficient chip for thin iPad sized tablets before they can hope to deliver SoCs for smartphones to compete against ARM.
They are too late in the Game. Take a look at Microsoft's Zune. It is a decent player and the music distribution scheme is a more price appealing one than Apple's but they can't gain market share. Apple had brand loyalty and excellent marketing for its' products.
Microsoft has never been able to market after the successful Start Me Up Windows 95 campaign it went down hill and continues.
Nokia shares were down substantially after the MS alliance announcement. It would appear that the market is signaling that their interpretation of the move is one of desperation.
What is your problem with numbers. Nokias entire R&D costs are $4 billion, of which around $1 is for Symbian. Yeah is is excessive, but not as bad as you constantly try and misrepresent it as.
The problem with Nokia's R&D is that they have way too many products. What this means is that each product gets just a small fraction of that R&D. Apple, on the other hand, has a small number of products. Their much smaller budget still allows much more dollars to be spent on each product, and it shows. Nokia is committed to making dozens of phones to meet every need and niche. That's a problem, and only works when their competitors are doing the same. None of them gain much of an advantage. But when a company takes a different approach, as Apple has done, it disrupts this concept. What Apple has done is to have people who would otherwise have bought into different segments of Nokia's phones, buy instead into Apple's one segment, displacing a number of different Nokia products.
Now, Android has also disrupted that flow of products from Nokia. Nokia's R&D isn't helping them, because it doesn't allow for much work to be done to come out with something really different, and superior. It took Apple at least two years to come out with the iPhone, and a year between new releases, with just one model. Nokia, because of the way they're perceived, can't exist with just one model. We can look to the good, but not great N8. it sold pretty well actually, but only about 8 million at last count. Nokia would need about five models in the same price range selling about the same amount, to stay in the game at high enough sales levels to maintain, and even increase their marketshare, and it Ain't gonna happen, because they can't spend the R&D dollars on five different high end models. Selling cheaper ones, as they do, keeps sales up, but profits down.
Now, as far as those Symbian R&D dollars go, well, they will be replaced by license fees to MS, so they haven't gained anything there. In their slide, in the financial report given Friday, after the MS affair, they showed that their margins would be lower than before, pulled down by expected license fees to MS. So there's no question about that.
I fail to see what benefit they're getting here financially in the short or medium term.
I do see their smartphone sales dropping, rather than having a 36% increase as we've seen with Symbian. You're in Europe. How much visibility does WP7 have? It's sold in France, I believe, but where else? How is it marketed? IS it marketed? What was the presence of Win Mobile earlier, and now?
Sorry for all the questions, but that's something that is hard to find out from here in the US.
Nokia is committed to making dozens of phones to meet every need and niche.
I think that strategy came from having close ties to network operators. Nokia traditionally saw their customers as the networks. And the multi product strategy was what the networks were asking for.
You are completely right that this de-focussed the company, and allowed R&D investment to be wastefully spent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
I fail to see what benefit they're getting here financially in the short or medium term.
I am guessing that Nokia believe that WP7 gives them a chance at profitability once again.
Theoretically a WP7 device will have a much greater profit margin than a Symbian device.
Symbian devices have been stuck at commodity prices for a while.
The problem has been that Atom vs ARM for the 7-10" form factor hasn't been very favorable.
Personally, I'd prefer a WP7 based tablet over a Win7 based tablet but ultimately it really depends on a good touch port for MS Office and a good touch UI environment over the actual kernel. Whether that core is NT based or not doesn't seem to matter all that much.
The problem with Nokia's R&D is that they have way too many products. What this means is that each product gets just a small fraction of that R&D. Apple, on the other hand, has a small number of products.
I think you still are confusing the handset division of Nokia with their other divisions. You can think what you like about the handset division, but don't forget that divisions like NSN are nothing like anything Apple does, you can't use the consolidated R&D figures to compare the two companies, it is no different than comparing the R&D figures of McDonalds with Apple.
I think you still are confusing the handset division of Nokia with their other divisions. You can think what you like about the handset division, but don't forget that divisions like NSN are nothing like anything Apple does, you can't use the consolidated R&D figures to compare the two companies, it is no different than comparing the R&D figures of McDonalds with Apple.
And Apple makes things Nokia doesn't. Outside of NSN (and are their R&D figures even included in Nokia's? My impression is that it's a separate company, with each parent company holding a 50% stake), what are the other products that Nokia makes that makes the comparison misleading? I know of a few internet tablets and appliances, a few GPS units, accessories, I think they released a netbook-ish thing at one point.
If anything, Apple has a broader portfolio, while being more focused on fewer models.
Given that Acer is #2 worldwide and announced a win7 tablet last year that's hardly a true statement.
Here's a picture of that "tablet".
Acer also sells an Android tablet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
Dell has also unveiled a 10" win7 tablet.
Not for sale yet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
Asus has a win7 tablet
Here it is.
Asus are also doing an Android tablet.
So yes, some OEMs are tentativly releasing some tablet-like devices. But the fact that they are all offering an alternative OS says something.
It says, "we are not convinced that Windows 7 makes a good tablet OS."
Microsoft has not convinced any manufacturer to exclusively back its Windows tablet software.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
Personally, I'd prefer a WP7 based tablet over a Win7 based tablet but ultimately it really depends on a good touch port for MS Office and a good touch UI environment over the actual kernel. Whether that core is NT based or not doesn't seem to matter all that much.
I don't think people buying tablets are doing so to run office productivity applications. The tablet is really the first type of personal computer which didn't have office equipment in its DNA.
I think you still are confusing the handset division of Nokia with their other divisions. You can think what you like about the handset division, but don't forget that divisions like NSN are nothing like anything Apple does, you can't use the consolidated R&D figures to compare the two companies, it is no different than comparing the R&D figures of McDonalds with Apple.
in response to all the criticism, today Elop added that MS will be paying Nokia "billions" as part of the deal.
of course it's really a cheap quasi-acquisition by MS, since Nokia will have no real business independence left. i guess you can say, as many have, it turns Nokia into the smartphone Dell - an OEM almost totally limited to selling products with MS software (once Symbian is phased out and MeeGo inevitably becomes MeeGone).
except of course there is still a huge market for Windows PC's to keep Dell alive, while there is almost no market so far for WP7 smartphones. Will Nokia's customers stick with it and wait until Nokia comes out with models that have a new Nokia-ized top level UI? which will take most of this year? i think a great many will not.
and what about the other OEM's? will any continue to make WP7 products when they have to continue to pay MS for the OS, while MS is at the same time subsidizing Nokia, their competitor? i don't think so. i doubt we will see many new WP7 phones from them after the current/upcoming models. Many OEM's will drop it entirely.
which leaves Android to pick up all those pieces of the commodity OEM market i suppose.
I still say the big problem for Nokia in this deal is not getting to be the exclusive manufacturer of WP7 phones.
Maybe the other OEMs back off on their WP7 offerings if it appears Nokia is getting preferential treatment, but what happens if those Nokia phones take off? Suddenly WP7 is an attractive OS, and as it stands there's nothing to stop Samsung et al from swooping in and capitalizing on that popularity.
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if that wasn't more or less the plan-- let Nokia do all the heavy lifting, and if it pays off, jump in. Just because they'll be an early mover with a nascent OS won't give them much of an advantage if other manufacturers put their mind to it-- just ask Motorola.
M$ is in decline, but they have some cash cows and no real competition in certain places where they still have a monopoly. But everyone now knows they can't innovate and they can't be trusted. All their ventures outside of Windows/Office have failed or lost money.
And by everyone, you mean you and your best mate..?
Because last time I checked, 99% (figuratively speaking) of Enterprise market trusted MS - and for reason - while their home market share wasn't too shabby either.
I don't agree. I think we'll see a 4-way share: RIM, WP7, iOS, Android. Apple will enjoy the high end and all the profits, RIM will continue to have success in the business market where IT likes complexity and micromanagement, Android will have Droid fans who think it's "open" and will compete with Apple in market share but not revenue, and then WP7 will pick up the low end of the market for all those that don't know any better; and M$ will be the only WP7 'partner' making money - well, after loosing money on it for 5+ years first.
But RIM will suffer from WP7, unless something dramatic happens. Micromanagement of WP7 phones is already built in MS Exchange 2010 and it does not require anything like BES server, thus cutting licensing costs, maintenance costs and complexity. Add to that SharePoint integration and other technologies MS is linking together, I think RIM will find themselves in the next year or two in bigger trouble than any other big player on the market.
Don't ever forget, though, that we are talking about Microsoft. I honestly believe that this deal will go nowhere for Nokia... not until Ballmer is removed... but with M$ still getting billions in profits I can't see that day coming any time soon. Ballmer is stuck in the past... imo the man doesn't have an innovative bone in his body. Nokia needs innovation in hardware and in software... and they need to be able to trust their partner to help them move forward. Do the words Microsoft and trust go together?
[ on edit - as far as Google is concerned... give it another year or two and I believe that the fragmentation issue will actually begin to come back and bite the oem's who use the system... I also beleive that even if the Android system continues to grow it will be in name only... again (imo) the fragmentation issue will make each oem appear to have a separate system on their phones]
You are presuming that Balmer has same influence in MS that Jobs has/had in Apple.
Which is not necessarily true.
Thinking of it, MS had more successful new products under Ballmer than they did have under Gates at the end of his reign. Gates was "brain" behind keeping XP forever and then coming out with half-baked Vista. Gates was "brain" when MS didn't have any refreshes in servers' segment between 2003 and 2008. Heck, even Office was not refreshed between 2003 and 2007. And WinMo was pretty much stagnating with minor updates.
With Ballmer, "Monkey-boy" as he might be, MS came out with Windows 7; Windows Phone 7; Server 2008 and 2008 R2; Exchange 2010; Hyper-V; And some other very nice technologies.
Much as I can see, MS was stagnating at the end of Gates era; and is coming back to creating better, more innovative products with more frequent refreshes under Ballmer.
He might be overweight, bald, not hansom and all that, but I think he is well aware of his shortcomings when it comes to technology and is actually listening to more knowledgeable people around him.
They are too late in the Game. Take a look at Microsoft's Zune. It is a decent player and the music distribution scheme is a more price appealing one than Apple's but they can't gain market share. Apple had brand loyalty and excellent marketing for its' products.
Microsoft has never been able to market after the successful Start Me Up Windows 95 campaign it went down hill and continues.
Nokia shares were down substantially after the MS alliance announcement. It would appear that the market is signaling that their interpretation of the move is one of desperation.
Nokia also does command brand loyalty, and I think that was one of the key factors that did motivate MS to enter this deal.
Comments
That'll really piss Intel off.
MeeGo is the child of Moblin and Maemo. It was the only mobile OS that would run on x86. Now that it's days look numbered, Intel are without a mobile platform for its Atom chips. At least until Windows 8 comes out.
This really was bad news for Intel.
Until Moorestown is more than a demo Intel really doesn't have a whole lot to bitch about. The LG GW990 never shipped so AFAIK Intel has nada on the market.
Actually, I'm guessing all the mobile OS could run on x86 but there isn't an x86 based smartphone platform yet. As far as tablets go, MeeGo and android would both run. Intel demo'd Android 2.1 on Moorestown already.
Former Nokia exec Tomi Ahonen thinks this move is insane.
This is the same yahoo that claimed this would never happen despite everyone saying "Yeah, it's gonna happen". WTF would anyone think his analysis is worth bupkis?
The guy is an idiot if he really thinks the MS development community is miniscule. Especially in comparison to qt. No one gives a shit about symbian devs because developing for symbian always sucked. Moving to qt is better but MS has a world class dev environment.
While it's true that Intel knew about all the older phones, that isn't the way it was supposed to be working out in the future. This was a plan for both companies. Nokia would supposedly be getting a better OS, and Intel was going to sell its chips in the smartphone market.
http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...artphone_plans
That WAS the idea. Now, it's smashed. We MAY be seeing a MeeGo phone at some point, perhaps to fulfill a contractual obligation. But it's dead otherwise.
It was smashed when LG pulled their moorestown phone. 2010 was when Moorestown was supposedly to launch and compete with ARM. It's 2011 and not so much.
Symbian, as far as it goes, is dead as well.
Good riddance.
But Nokia now has no serious tablet plan. It's been pretty much agreed upon in the industry that tablets are tied to smartphones. Apple has that plan. HP has that plan. Google, to a lessor degree, has that plan, even RIM does. But Microsoft doesn't. And now that means that Nokia doesn't either.
Tablets are not necessarily tied to smartphones. Some are derived from smartphones but they don't need to be tied. Their success appears to be tied to ecosystems.
To state that MS doesn't have tablet plans is simplistic given they have both WP7 and a ARM port for Win7. MS has an ecosystem to support the XBox. Even the oft derided Zune ecosystem is of great value given that its video platform it has 17% share...ahead of sony.
http://www.isuppli.com/Media-Researc...s-Inroads.aspx
So Nokia has gained access to the XBox Live games ecosystem and the Zune video ecosystem.
In any case, Nokia can continue to drive toward MeeGo and a Moorestown based MID/Tablet. Intel has to deliver a power efficient chip for thin iPad sized tablets before they can hope to deliver SoCs for smartphones to compete against ARM.
Microsoft has never been able to market after the successful Start Me Up Windows 95 campaign it went down hill and continues.
Nokia shares were down substantially after the MS alliance announcement. It would appear that the market is signaling that their interpretation of the move is one of desperation.
We know you hate Nokia
I don't hate Nokia. I am angry at a management who have driven a company from a world-beating position to the brink of disaster.
C.
To state that MS doesn't have tablet plans is simplistic given they have both WP7 and a ARM port for Win7.
And who is going to make a Microsoft tablet?
HP is clearly going to get behind the TouchPad - and Dell is shipping Android tablets.
Every major Windows PC manufacturer has abandoned Microsoft's tablet strategy.
C.
What is your problem with numbers. Nokias entire R&D costs are $4 billion, of which around $1 is for Symbian. Yeah is is excessive, but not as bad as you constantly try and misrepresent it as.
The problem with Nokia's R&D is that they have way too many products. What this means is that each product gets just a small fraction of that R&D. Apple, on the other hand, has a small number of products. Their much smaller budget still allows much more dollars to be spent on each product, and it shows. Nokia is committed to making dozens of phones to meet every need and niche. That's a problem, and only works when their competitors are doing the same. None of them gain much of an advantage. But when a company takes a different approach, as Apple has done, it disrupts this concept. What Apple has done is to have people who would otherwise have bought into different segments of Nokia's phones, buy instead into Apple's one segment, displacing a number of different Nokia products.
Now, Android has also disrupted that flow of products from Nokia. Nokia's R&D isn't helping them, because it doesn't allow for much work to be done to come out with something really different, and superior. It took Apple at least two years to come out with the iPhone, and a year between new releases, with just one model. Nokia, because of the way they're perceived, can't exist with just one model. We can look to the good, but not great N8. it sold pretty well actually, but only about 8 million at last count. Nokia would need about five models in the same price range selling about the same amount, to stay in the game at high enough sales levels to maintain, and even increase their marketshare, and it Ain't gonna happen, because they can't spend the R&D dollars on five different high end models. Selling cheaper ones, as they do, keeps sales up, but profits down.
Now, as far as those Symbian R&D dollars go, well, they will be replaced by license fees to MS, so they haven't gained anything there. In their slide, in the financial report given Friday, after the MS affair, they showed that their margins would be lower than before, pulled down by expected license fees to MS. So there's no question about that.
I fail to see what benefit they're getting here financially in the short or medium term.
I do see their smartphone sales dropping, rather than having a 36% increase as we've seen with Symbian. You're in Europe. How much visibility does WP7 have? It's sold in France, I believe, but where else? How is it marketed? IS it marketed? What was the presence of Win Mobile earlier, and now?
Sorry for all the questions, but that's something that is hard to find out from here in the US.
Nokia is committed to making dozens of phones to meet every need and niche.
I think that strategy came from having close ties to network operators. Nokia traditionally saw their customers as the networks. And the multi product strategy was what the networks were asking for.
You are completely right that this de-focussed the company, and allowed R&D investment to be wastefully spent.
I fail to see what benefit they're getting here financially in the short or medium term.
I am guessing that Nokia believe that WP7 gives them a chance at profitability once again.
Theoretically a WP7 device will have a much greater profit margin than a Symbian device.
Symbian devices have been stuck at commodity prices for a while.
It'll be interesting to see what happens.
C.
And who is going to make a Microsoft tablet?
HP is clearly going to get behind the TouchPad - and Dell is shipping Android tablets.
Every major Windows PC manufacturer has abandoned Microsoft's tablet strategy.
C.
Given that Acer is #2 worldwide and announced a win7 tablet last year that's hardly a true statement.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/23/a...ed-inbuilt-3g/
Dell has also unveiled a 10" win7 tablet.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20031025-1.html
Asus has a win7 tablet
http://goodereader.com/blog/tablet-s...for-pre-order/
The problem has been that Atom vs ARM for the 7-10" form factor hasn't been very favorable.
Personally, I'd prefer a WP7 based tablet over a Win7 based tablet but ultimately it really depends on a good touch port for MS Office and a good touch UI environment over the actual kernel. Whether that core is NT based or not doesn't seem to matter all that much.
The problem with Nokia's R&D is that they have way too many products. What this means is that each product gets just a small fraction of that R&D. Apple, on the other hand, has a small number of products.
I think you still are confusing the handset division of Nokia with their other divisions. You can think what you like about the handset division, but don't forget that divisions like NSN are nothing like anything Apple does, you can't use the consolidated R&D figures to compare the two companies, it is no different than comparing the R&D figures of McDonalds with Apple.
I think you still are confusing the handset division of Nokia with their other divisions. You can think what you like about the handset division, but don't forget that divisions like NSN are nothing like anything Apple does, you can't use the consolidated R&D figures to compare the two companies, it is no different than comparing the R&D figures of McDonalds with Apple.
And Apple makes things Nokia doesn't. Outside of NSN (and are their R&D figures even included in Nokia's? My impression is that it's a separate company, with each parent company holding a 50% stake), what are the other products that Nokia makes that makes the comparison misleading? I know of a few internet tablets and appliances, a few GPS units, accessories, I think they released a netbook-ish thing at one point.
If anything, Apple has a broader portfolio, while being more focused on fewer models.
Given that Acer is #2 worldwide and announced a win7 tablet last year that's hardly a true statement.
Here's a picture of that "tablet".
Acer also sells an Android tablet.
Dell has also unveiled a 10" win7 tablet.
Not for sale yet.
Asus has a win7 tablet
Here it is.
Asus are also doing an Android tablet.
So yes, some OEMs are tentativly releasing some tablet-like devices. But the fact that they are all offering an alternative OS says something.
It says, "we are not convinced that Windows 7 makes a good tablet OS."
Microsoft has not convinced any manufacturer to exclusively back its Windows tablet software.
Personally, I'd prefer a WP7 based tablet over a Win7 based tablet but ultimately it really depends on a good touch port for MS Office and a good touch UI environment over the actual kernel. Whether that core is NT based or not doesn't seem to matter all that much.
I don't think people buying tablets are doing so to run office productivity applications. The tablet is really the first type of personal computer which didn't have office equipment in its DNA.
C.
I think you still are confusing the handset division of Nokia with their other divisions. You can think what you like about the handset division, but don't forget that divisions like NSN are nothing like anything Apple does, you can't use the consolidated R&D figures to compare the two companies, it is no different than comparing the R&D figures of McDonalds with Apple.
What profit does NSN deliver?
C.
of course it's really a cheap quasi-acquisition by MS, since Nokia will have no real business independence left. i guess you can say, as many have, it turns Nokia into the smartphone Dell - an OEM almost totally limited to selling products with MS software (once Symbian is phased out and MeeGo inevitably becomes MeeGone).
except of course there is still a huge market for Windows PC's to keep Dell alive, while there is almost no market so far for WP7 smartphones. Will Nokia's customers stick with it and wait until Nokia comes out with models that have a new Nokia-ized top level UI? which will take most of this year? i think a great many will not.
and what about the other OEM's? will any continue to make WP7 products when they have to continue to pay MS for the OS, while MS is at the same time subsidizing Nokia, their competitor? i don't think so. i doubt we will see many new WP7 phones from them after the current/upcoming models. Many OEM's will drop it entirely.
which leaves Android to pick up all those pieces of the commodity OEM market i suppose.
Maybe the other OEMs back off on their WP7 offerings if it appears Nokia is getting preferential treatment, but what happens if those Nokia phones take off? Suddenly WP7 is an attractive OS, and as it stands there's nothing to stop Samsung et al from swooping in and capitalizing on that popularity.
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if that wasn't more or less the plan-- let Nokia do all the heavy lifting, and if it pays off, jump in. Just because they'll be an early mover with a nascent OS won't give them much of an advantage if other manufacturers put their mind to it-- just ask Motorola.
M$ is in decline, but they have some cash cows and no real competition in certain places where they still have a monopoly. But everyone now knows they can't innovate and they can't be trusted. All their ventures outside of Windows/Office have failed or lost money.
And by everyone, you mean you and your best mate..?
Because last time I checked, 99% (figuratively speaking) of Enterprise market trusted MS - and for reason - while their home market share wasn't too shabby either.
I don't agree. I think we'll see a 4-way share: RIM, WP7, iOS, Android. Apple will enjoy the high end and all the profits, RIM will continue to have success in the business market where IT likes complexity and micromanagement, Android will have Droid fans who think it's "open" and will compete with Apple in market share but not revenue, and then WP7 will pick up the low end of the market for all those that don't know any better; and M$ will be the only WP7 'partner' making money - well, after loosing money on it for 5+ years first.
But RIM will suffer from WP7, unless something dramatic happens. Micromanagement of WP7 phones is already built in MS Exchange 2010 and it does not require anything like BES server, thus cutting licensing costs, maintenance costs and complexity. Add to that SharePoint integration and other technologies MS is linking together, I think RIM will find themselves in the next year or two in bigger trouble than any other big player on the market.
Don't ever forget, though, that we are talking about Microsoft. I honestly believe that this deal will go nowhere for Nokia... not until Ballmer is removed... but with M$ still getting billions in profits I can't see that day coming any time soon. Ballmer is stuck in the past... imo the man doesn't have an innovative bone in his body. Nokia needs innovation in hardware and in software... and they need to be able to trust their partner to help them move forward. Do the words Microsoft and trust go together?
[ on edit - as far as Google is concerned... give it another year or two and I believe that the fragmentation issue will actually begin to come back and bite the oem's who use the system... I also beleive that even if the Android system continues to grow it will be in name only... again (imo) the fragmentation issue will make each oem appear to have a separate system on their phones]
You are presuming that Balmer has same influence in MS that Jobs has/had in Apple.
Which is not necessarily true.
Thinking of it, MS had more successful new products under Ballmer than they did have under Gates at the end of his reign. Gates was "brain" behind keeping XP forever and then coming out with half-baked Vista. Gates was "brain" when MS didn't have any refreshes in servers' segment between 2003 and 2008. Heck, even Office was not refreshed between 2003 and 2007. And WinMo was pretty much stagnating with minor updates.
With Ballmer, "Monkey-boy" as he might be, MS came out with Windows 7; Windows Phone 7; Server 2008 and 2008 R2; Exchange 2010; Hyper-V; And some other very nice technologies.
Much as I can see, MS was stagnating at the end of Gates era; and is coming back to creating better, more innovative products with more frequent refreshes under Ballmer.
He might be overweight, bald, not hansom and all that, but I think he is well aware of his shortcomings when it comes to technology and is actually listening to more knowledgeable people around him.
They are too late in the Game. Take a look at Microsoft's Zune. It is a decent player and the music distribution scheme is a more price appealing one than Apple's but they can't gain market share. Apple had brand loyalty and excellent marketing for its' products.
Microsoft has never been able to market after the successful Start Me Up Windows 95 campaign it went down hill and continues.
Nokia shares were down substantially after the MS alliance announcement. It would appear that the market is signaling that their interpretation of the move is one of desperation.
Nokia also does command brand loyalty, and I think that was one of the key factors that did motivate MS to enter this deal.