Yeh they're doing great, they're losing market share in the US faster than any other handset maker, and it's their strongest market. They haven't turned a steady profit in years. There's a reason that Icahn is trying to sell off the patent portfolio.
Oh... so now you're changing the argument... we're talking about brands. Motorola is recognized throughout the world. iOS on Moto would only strengthen the Moto brand... which is what makes you wrong by saying the Moto brand is in "terminal" decline.
Quote:
In the car industry some of them sell plenty Mini Cooper, VW Bug, Skoda. In the clothing industry they can be the bulk of income - Armani doesn't make most of his money from the Georgio or Collezione labels.
Are you saying the Mini Cooper and the Bug are diffusion brands??!! Hmmmm... I guess the Explorer is a diffusion brand... and the iPod Touch is a diffusion brand... I think you better go back and look up diffusion brands.
Quote:
Apple pulled out of licensing its OS for this very reason. They wanted the licensees to go out and compete in the low end, but instead they came right back and competed directly with Apple.
Really, this is why you think Steve killed the licensing??!! I can't do your homework for you... sorry.
Quote:
Ok- well you have a problem here. Moto is worth 7Billion, it has no debt, liabilities roughly match assets with around 3 billion in cash left over. If the patents are worth more than 6 billion then Moto's phone business has considerable negative value - ie. the Moto brand value is negative.
Which is it? Is the motorola brand worthless or are the patents worth under 4 billion?
What??!! You're equating the brand with the value of the company. Brand isn't just the value of a company, it's the recognition factor. ... shit I can't even answer that because your logic is so fucked...
Okay... I'm outta here... I can see you really don't understand the concept of brands and diffusion brands.
Sure i did, you just do not like the answer. The real question is why did you not answer my original question? Why would anyone in their right mind buy yet another cloner Microsoft Windows Phone from Nokia? There are plenty of other cloners out there and those are not selling at all. Care to answer? Wait let me guess...marketing? The 500 million they spent was not enough?
Oh... so now you're changing the argument... we're talking about brands. Motorola is recognized throughout the world. iOS on Moto would only strengthen the Moto brand... which is what makes you wrong by saying the Moto brand is in "terminal" decline.
Yes, it's recognised, but people don't pay extra for it - they have no brand power. Recognition is worthless - an Edsel is well recognised. An iOS Moto phone would be great eh? Just like the huge success that was the ROKR.
Quote:
Are you saying the Mini Cooper and the Bug are diffusion brands??!! Hmmmm... I guess the Explorer is a diffusion brand... and the iPod Touch is a diffusion brand... I think you better go back and look up diffusion brands.
Yes BMW bought Rover precisely to go downmarket, the Mini was the only part of the Rover brand worth saving, and it became effectively a BMW diffusion brand. Sorry to have these inconvenient facts and all. VW's top end stuff is Audi.
Quote:
Really, this is why you think Steve killed the licensing??!! I can't do your homework for you... sorry.
What??!! You're equating the brand with the value of the company. Brand isn't just the value of a company, it's the recognition factor. ... shit I can't even answer that because your logic is so fucked...
Brand value of a firm is what is left over when you take away everything else. If there was appreciable brand value in Moto it would be reflected in the share price. ie. Moto's breakup value would be the sum of cash, patents, brand value and business. Now their business is not making money, but it isn't losing much either, so it's unlikely to have a very high negative value.
Do as they say, the maths.
Quote:
Okay... I'm outta here... I can see you really don't understand the concept of brands and diffusion brands.
[You are ow on ignore]
I find it amusing when people write a big response and then say 'and I'm ignoring you'. It's kinda cute. You stay classy mister.
Sure i did, you just do not like the answer. The real question is why did you not answer my original question? Why would anyone in their right mind buy yet another cloner Microsoft Windows Phone from Nokia? There are plenty of other cloners out there and those are not selling at all. Care to answer? Wait let me guess...marketing? The 500 million they spent was not enough?
Calling them 'cloner' phones just sounds silly you know.
What you american folk don't grok is out there in the big wide world where GSM reigns supreme and uncontested, Nokia has historically been amazingly strong. 60% plus market share practically everywhere but the US. It has a reputation for solidly engineered handsets with great battery life, great reception and really really lousy user interfaces. People didn't love Nokia, but it was the default choice for a new handset, because the build quality was about the best you could get pre iPhone.
It has tremendous name recognition, and was still mostly holding its share until the last year - when it so magnificently Osbourned itself. Perhaps more importantly than consumer brand, Nokia still has considerable channel presence, they can get phones onto networks and into shops.
Nokia is betting the farm on WP7, they're committed to it beyond the level that HTC or Samsung are. Frankly they're more committed to it than MS is. If they can just get some models out they have a far greater chance of shifting WP7 phones simply because they'll be at every price point, in every market, on every carrier.
Even saying all that I still don't think it will be enough, I think Nokia's brand took a torpedo below the waterline, but there is an outside chance of it.
And even though RIM hasn't demonstrated that they really know what to do with it, their purchase of QNX arguably puts them ahead, technically, of Microsoft's underlying OS for WP7
I'd agree with that.
WinCE is a pretty terrible. It's not modular, and it's not scalable. I think that's one of the main reasons you'll never see WPx on a tablet.
What I was was talking about is the user experience offered by the OS rather than the quality and design of the underlying OS code.
I did though! <raises hand and looks eager> Pick me! Pick me! Me! Me!
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer
Good question! I'd go with
Terrible branding...
Terrible marketing....
Lack of existing users....
Indifferent sales channel....
Lack of a tablet offering...
Lack of an ecosystem - Apple and Google can trumpet their hundreds of thousands of apps. WP7, not so much.
I almost totally agree.
Probably the biggest issue for me personally is the current hole where a tablet should be. I love the way my iPhone and iPad work with each other and I could never move to a platform that didn't support the same functionality.
Windows 8 is the potential key here which brings me to the next point...
Lack of an ecosystem. Apart from the word "ecosystem" giving me a headache because of its ambiguity I actually think Microsoft are doing a decent job here at the moment.
Having WP7 piggy-back the top class development tools used by Windows developers was a brilliant move.
Getting Microsoft Game Studios to start developing games for WP7 was another (I actually think Apple should to purchase a few game devs and create an "Apple Game Studios", but that's a conversation for another day).
However, Windows 8 is again the key here and is basically the make or break point for Windows as a consumer brand.
If they do end up splitting the development platforms, so you have Silverlight/XNA on the phone, DirectX/XNA on the Xbox and HTML5 on the PC/tablet I can't see how the "apps ecosystem" can continue to grow around Windows Phone.
I just can't see it being a large enough platform to sustain itself in this initial growth stage.
However if they ensure some degree of code portability between PC, tablet, phone and Xbox I don't see the phone having a problem.
We should know all the answers come BUILD in September
You didn't. You wrote a bunch of stuff whinging about the OS which is less that worthless because you haven't used it.
I don't go around complaining to people about the hardships of playing pro football. People would probably question my mental state if I did. You should have the same decency.
The user experience offered by WP7 isn't even in question.
However if they ensure some degree of code portability between PC, tablet, phone and Xbox I don't see the phone having a problem.
Too much code portability could easily be a bad thing though - resulting in tons of sloppy PC ports to mobile and a perception that the Apps are generally of low quality. Also by the time W-8 comes out the tablet market may be too big for them to break into.
XBox is an interesting point, as are games in general. It seems that the console market is one where Apple should be playing - no doubt they've thought about it though and either have decided not to or will blow us all away in a year or two.
You didn't. You wrote a bunch of stuff whinging about the OS which is less that worthless because you haven't used it.
Obvious troll is obvious. Again, does not answer my question. Let me restate it yet again...why is anyone going to buy a Microsoft Windows cloner phone from Nokia when they are not buying the cloners from HTC, Samsung, etc... now? How is Nokia's phone different from the other cloners? It its camera going to be one mega pixel larger?
Too much code portability could easily be a bad thing though - resulting in tons of sloppy PC ports to mobile and a perception that the Apps are generally of low quality.
True. There is a certain balance that needs to be met and it needs to lean more toward code being written efficiently enough to run on a phone is reused in tablet/PC applications rather than code being written inefficiently for the PC being reused in phone/tablet applications.
I think part of the high quality of apps on the iPad app store came from the shared development environment.
Personally I hope that phone code paradigms start to make their way to the PC. Programmers have become progressively more and more sloppy with code over the years as PC specifications have increased.
I am sure you realize, Microsoft Windows Phone is built on top of the terrible Win CE, right?
Yes. I'll quote the conversion for you if you missed it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dlux
And even though RIM hasn't demonstrated that they really know what to do with it, their purchase of QNX arguably puts them ahead, technically, of Microsoft's underlying OS for WP7.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475
I'd agree with that. WinCE is a pretty terrible. It's not modular, and it's not scalable. I think that's one of the main reasons you'll never see WPx on a tablet.
Comments
*blah*
You didn't address my question.
You could argue for Android. You would be wrong, but you could at least you could argue for it... But RIM?
That's what I said
You didn't address my question.
I did though! <raises hand and looks eager> Pick me! Pick me! Me! Me!
Wait a minute. Apple paid Nokia somewhere in the US$450-600 range, but Nokia still posted a 400+ EUR loss? Wow. Just wow.
It kinda got wiped out by the one time hit they took dumping all their old software guys onto Accenture.
You could argue for Android. You would be wrong, but you could at least you could argue for it... But RIM?
Do we have to go through all that again? Go read the entire thread.
If you're going to post ambiguous assertions then don't complain if the discussion gets off track like this.
Yeh they're doing great, they're losing market share in the US faster than any other handset maker, and it's their strongest market. They haven't turned a steady profit in years. There's a reason that Icahn is trying to sell off the patent portfolio.
Oh... so now you're changing the argument... we're talking about brands. Motorola is recognized throughout the world. iOS on Moto would only strengthen the Moto brand... which is what makes you wrong by saying the Moto brand is in "terminal" decline.
In the car industry some of them sell plenty Mini Cooper, VW Bug, Skoda. In the clothing industry they can be the bulk of income - Armani doesn't make most of his money from the Georgio or Collezione labels.
Are you saying the Mini Cooper and the Bug are diffusion brands??!! Hmmmm... I guess the Explorer is a diffusion brand... and the iPod Touch is a diffusion brand... I think you better go back and look up diffusion brands.
Apple pulled out of licensing its OS for this very reason. They wanted the licensees to go out and compete in the low end, but instead they came right back and competed directly with Apple.
Really, this is why you think Steve killed the licensing??!! I can't do your homework for you... sorry.
Ok- well you have a problem here. Moto is worth 7Billion, it has no debt, liabilities roughly match assets with around 3 billion in cash left over. If the patents are worth more than 6 billion then Moto's phone business has considerable negative value - ie. the Moto brand value is negative.
Which is it? Is the motorola brand worthless or are the patents worth under 4 billion?
What??!! You're equating the brand with the value of the company. Brand isn't just the value of a company, it's the recognition factor. ... shit I can't even answer that because your logic is so fucked...
Okay... I'm outta here... I can see you really don't understand the concept of brands and diffusion brands.
[You are now on ignore]
You didn't address my question.
Sure i did, you just do not like the answer. The real question is why did you not answer my original question? Why would anyone in their right mind buy yet another cloner Microsoft Windows Phone from Nokia? There are plenty of other cloners out there and those are not selling at all. Care to answer? Wait let me guess...marketing? The 500 million they spent was not enough?
Oh... so now you're changing the argument... we're talking about brands. Motorola is recognized throughout the world. iOS on Moto would only strengthen the Moto brand... which is what makes you wrong by saying the Moto brand is in "terminal" decline.
Yes, it's recognised, but people don't pay extra for it - they have no brand power. Recognition is worthless - an Edsel is well recognised. An iOS Moto phone would be great eh? Just like the huge success that was the ROKR.
Are you saying the Mini Cooper and the Bug are diffusion brands??!! Hmmmm... I guess the Explorer is a diffusion brand... and the iPod Touch is a diffusion brand... I think you better go back and look up diffusion brands.
Yes BMW bought Rover precisely to go downmarket, the Mini was the only part of the Rover brand worth saving, and it became effectively a BMW diffusion brand. Sorry to have these inconvenient facts and all. VW's top end stuff is Audi.
Really, this is why you think Steve killed the licensing??!! I can't do your homework for you... sorry.
Yes, because he alluded it on the 1997 WWDC question and answer. http://onstartups.com/tabid/3339/bid...irca-1997.aspx
What??!! You're equating the brand with the value of the company. Brand isn't just the value of a company, it's the recognition factor. ... shit I can't even answer that because your logic is so fucked...
Brand value of a firm is what is left over when you take away everything else. If there was appreciable brand value in Moto it would be reflected in the share price. ie. Moto's breakup value would be the sum of cash, patents, brand value and business. Now their business is not making money, but it isn't losing much either, so it's unlikely to have a very high negative value.
Do as they say, the maths.
Okay... I'm outta here... I can see you really don't understand the concept of brands and diffusion brands.
[You are ow on ignore]
I find it amusing when people write a big response and then say 'and I'm ignoring you'. It's kinda cute. You stay classy mister.
Sure i did, you just do not like the answer. The real question is why did you not answer my original question? Why would anyone in their right mind buy yet another cloner Microsoft Windows Phone from Nokia? There are plenty of other cloners out there and those are not selling at all. Care to answer? Wait let me guess...marketing? The 500 million they spent was not enough?
Calling them 'cloner' phones just sounds silly you know.
What you american folk don't grok is out there in the big wide world where GSM reigns supreme and uncontested, Nokia has historically been amazingly strong. 60% plus market share practically everywhere but the US. It has a reputation for solidly engineered handsets with great battery life, great reception and really really lousy user interfaces. People didn't love Nokia, but it was the default choice for a new handset, because the build quality was about the best you could get pre iPhone.
It has tremendous name recognition, and was still mostly holding its share until the last year - when it so magnificently Osbourned itself. Perhaps more importantly than consumer brand, Nokia still has considerable channel presence, they can get phones onto networks and into shops.
Nokia is betting the farm on WP7, they're committed to it beyond the level that HTC or Samsung are. Frankly they're more committed to it than MS is. If they can just get some models out they have a far greater chance of shifting WP7 phones simply because they'll be at every price point, in every market, on every carrier.
Even saying all that I still don't think it will be enough, I think Nokia's brand took a torpedo below the waterline, but there is an outside chance of it.
And even though RIM hasn't demonstrated that they really know what to do with it, their purchase of QNX arguably puts them ahead, technically, of Microsoft's underlying OS for WP7
I'd agree with that.
WinCE is a pretty terrible. It's not modular, and it's not scalable. I think that's one of the main reasons you'll never see WPx on a tablet.
What I was was talking about is the user experience offered by the OS rather than the quality and design of the underlying OS code.
I did though! <raises hand and looks eager> Pick me! Pick me! Me! Me!
Good question! I'd go with
I almost totally agree.
Probably the biggest issue for me personally is the current hole where a tablet should be. I love the way my iPhone and iPad work with each other and I could never move to a platform that didn't support the same functionality.
Windows 8 is the potential key here which brings me to the next point...
Lack of an ecosystem. Apart from the word "ecosystem" giving me a headache because of its ambiguity I actually think Microsoft are doing a decent job here at the moment.
Having WP7 piggy-back the top class development tools used by Windows developers was a brilliant move.
Getting Microsoft Game Studios to start developing games for WP7 was another (I actually think Apple should to purchase a few game devs and create an "Apple Game Studios", but that's a conversation for another day).
However, Windows 8 is again the key here and is basically the make or break point for Windows as a consumer brand.
If they do end up splitting the development platforms, so you have Silverlight/XNA on the phone, DirectX/XNA on the Xbox and HTML5 on the PC/tablet I can't see how the "apps ecosystem" can continue to grow around Windows Phone.
I just can't see it being a large enough platform to sustain itself in this initial growth stage.
However if they ensure some degree of code portability between PC, tablet, phone and Xbox I don't see the phone having a problem.
We should know all the answers come BUILD in September
Sure i did
You didn't. You wrote a bunch of stuff whinging about the OS which is less that worthless because you haven't used it.
I don't go around complaining to people about the hardships of playing pro football. People would probably question my mental state if I did. You should have the same decency.
The user experience offered by WP7 isn't even in question.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess that you're in the US.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess you have no worthwhile response and would rather discuss me than my post.
Same.
Same.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess you have no worthwhile response and would rather discuss me than my post.
It's relevant because Americans have had a completely different experience of Nokia than the rest of the world. It would be like me saying
'Oh the Yankees, yeh I guess they're ok for a rounders team, but if they had real talent they'd be playing cricket'.
If you're not an american then your opinion on Nokia as a brand is different and interesting, if you are then it's just understandable parochialism.
However if they ensure some degree of code portability between PC, tablet, phone and Xbox I don't see the phone having a problem.
Too much code portability could easily be a bad thing though - resulting in tons of sloppy PC ports to mobile and a perception that the Apps are generally of low quality. Also by the time W-8 comes out the tablet market may be too big for them to break into.
XBox is an interesting point, as are games in general. It seems that the console market is one where Apple should be playing - no doubt they've thought about it though and either have decided not to or will blow us all away in a year or two.
I'd agree with that.
WinCE is a pretty terrible. It's not modular, and it's not scalable. I think that's one of the main reasons you'll never see WPx on a tablet.
What I was was talking about is the user experience offered by the OS rather than the quality and design of the underlying OS code.
I am sure you realize, Microsoft Windows Phone is built on top of the terrible Win CE, right? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WinCE
This is one of the many reasons Windows Phone is failing...it is built on a horrible base.
You didn't. You wrote a bunch of stuff whinging about the OS which is less that worthless because you haven't used it.
Obvious troll is obvious. Again, does not answer my question. Let me restate it yet again...why is anyone going to buy a Microsoft Windows cloner phone from Nokia when they are not buying the cloners from HTC, Samsung, etc... now? How is Nokia's phone different from the other cloners? It its camera going to be one mega pixel larger?
Too much code portability could easily be a bad thing though - resulting in tons of sloppy PC ports to mobile and a perception that the Apps are generally of low quality.
True. There is a certain balance that needs to be met and it needs to lean more toward code being written efficiently enough to run on a phone is reused in tablet/PC applications rather than code being written inefficiently for the PC being reused in phone/tablet applications.
I think part of the high quality of apps on the iPad app store came from the shared development environment.
Personally I hope that phone code paradigms start to make their way to the PC. Programmers have become progressively more and more sloppy with code over the years as PC specifications have increased.
I am sure you realize, Microsoft Windows Phone is built on top of the terrible Win CE, right?
Yes. I'll quote the conversion for you if you missed it.
And even though RIM hasn't demonstrated that they really know what to do with it, their purchase of QNX arguably puts them ahead, technically, of Microsoft's underlying OS for WP7.
I'd agree with that. WinCE is a pretty terrible. It's not modular, and it's not scalable. I think that's one of the main reasons you'll never see WPx on a tablet.