Unlike you, apparently, I owned two successful businesses. Large or small, there are some principles that apply.
Mel, why on earth are you trying to explain yourself?!?! You have every right to voice your opinion just like everyone else. Heck most people here present company included have zero problem voicing their opinions on issues that are often quite far from their comfort zone.
Where my mouth is at is calling out people who think they are more qualified than the members of the BOD of a multi-billion dollar megacorporation which sells more product than anybody else in their industry.
Buying Nokia will not constitute putting my money where my mouth is, unless Nokia puts these guys on their board of directors. In such an event, I will be happy to short Nokia immediately.
No, Android is given away to whomever wants it. Strictly speaking, Android is a loss leader for Google to support their other ventures.
And is unknowingly dumbing down all the cell phone makers in the process who previously developed/wrote/maintained their own OS and/or had multiple phones running under multiple OSes. Thanks to Google they've given all that up... hmmm I wonder whats gonna happen when google tires of Android. After all those pesky 'pet projects' at Google come and go like the wind.
You don't seem to have any proof that he can turn things around or that the current board of directors is making a smart decision.
That is because I have no opinion on either of those topics. Indeed, IMO, anybody who hazards a guess on either of those topics is speaking from a position of ignorance.
That one factor is not sufficient to make any sort of determination about the bottom line.
That is what I am saying.
I think we all know what you are saying...you are clearly pushing an agenda trying to say vendors should go with Microsoft Phone 7 because they will make more money, when the evidence clearly points to the contrary.
Sell 1,000,000 phones and pay $15 per phone to Microsoft= $15,000,000 to Microsoft and $15,000,000 less in your pocket, OR Sell 1,000,000 phones and $15,000,000 more in your profit column. Again, sounds pretty simple, unless of course you work for Microsoft.
That is because I have no opinion on either of those topics. Indeed, IMO, anybody who hazards a guess on either of those topics is speaking from a position of ignorance.
12th April 1912 - The Titanic sailed through calm waters.
14th April 1912 - 11:40 p.m. - The Titanic Struck the iceberg
15th April 1912\t12:00 a.m. - They engineers insist the ship is unsinkable
15th April 1912\t2.17 am\t - The last radio message was sent. The captain announced 'Every man for himself.
15th April 1912\t2.18 am - They appoint a new captain from Microsoft.
Nokia's survival requires a return to profitability. The low end devices make for plenty of activity but precious little profit.
The only option is to create a new product for the high end. But such a product demands they abandon their current path and create a massively attractive product that appeals to a mass consumer audience.
I don't think this is possible. Because Microsoft, Nokia and Sony all share a common weakness in that product development is led by engineers. The tail should not wag the dog.
That is because I have no opinion on either of those topics. Indeed, IMO, anybody who hazards a guess on either of those topics is speaking from a position of ignorance.
For a guy who has no opinion on the topic, you have WAY TOO MANY replies to this thread!!!
I wonder if the next Nokia smartphone will run Windows Phone 7.
If so, I wonder how much Ballmer paid Nokia's board members to install Elop.
Either way, it's a win-win situation for Nokia. If Elop can turn around their failed smartphone business, Nokia wins. If Elop runs Nokia's smartphone business into the ground, then at least it wasn't a Finn who killed it.
12th April 1912 - The Titanic sailed through calm waters.
14th April 1912 - 11:40 p.m. - The Titanic Struck the iceberg
15th April 1912\t12:00 a.m. - They engineers insist the ship is unsinkable
15th April 1912\t2.17 am\t - The last radio message was sent. The captain announced 'Every man for himself.
15th April 1912\t2.18 am - They appoint a new captain from Microsoft.
Nokia's survival requires a return to profitability. The low end devices make for plenty of activity but precious little profit.
The only option is to create a new product for the high end. But such a product demands they abandon their current path and create a massively attractive product that appeals to a mass consumer audience.
I don't think this is possible. Because Microsoft, Nokia and Sony all share a common weakness in that product development is led by engineers. The tail should not wag the dog.
C.
I beg to differ, product development is being led by consensus influenced by what uber geeks wants and not what the ordinary consumer would buy.
Likely they will sell it for a huge profit. Why would they make any other choice with such a successful venture?
Android might have survived, and even flourished, if Google had only stuck to the Java standard. But no, they messed with it and created their own VM. In clear violation of the Java license agreement (and if you're not 100% compliant, you are in violation according the language of the agreement.)
Oracle's lawsuit has merit. Android's near-perfect clone of Java is a perfect violation of the license agreement and Sun has already successfully sued Microsoft for a similar infraction. So let's see: clear evidence of an infraction + legal precedent = conviction.
Larry Ellison won't be taking any out-of-court settlement cash. He wants Android off the market, and that's what he's going to get. Good thing for Google that they have a backup plan in Chrome OS.
Sergey Brin said in public (at Google I/O this past May) that Chrome OS is Google's future. Boy was he right! Give the man a cookie.
I beg to differ, product development is being led by consensus influenced by what uber geeks wants and not what the ordinary consumer would buy.
I sort of agree. But I think the opinions, the values and ultimately the taste of engineers is all too visible in the final products.
The problem with engineers is they are smart and really don't mind complexity and weak aesthetics. It is part of the ability of an engineer to cope with and ignore weak design.
The consumer market is far more sensitive to weak design. Who knew?
I am puzzled about how Google intend to monetize Android.
We are even seeing Android devices which have Bing as the only search engine!
As far as I can see, Android is neither a loss maker or a profit maker for Google.
C.
That is what their AdMod acquisition was all about. Mobile ads. My guess is, at some point, they will also start to charge a license fee (perhaps for an 'Android-plus' version of some sort).
Also, unless you believe that human capital and R&D is free, it is, at the moment a loss-maker for Google.
Nope. I'm talking about people who have never sat on a BOD of a publicly-traded company, but who nevertheless think that they are more qualified to hire a CEO than those who do.
If the posters on this forum had to be qualified in anything to have an opinion .... we'd never hear from you!
Comments
Not Ok, ok?
Unlike you, apparently, I owned two successful businesses. Large or small, there are some principles that apply.
Mel, why on earth are you trying to explain yourself?!?! You have every right to voice your opinion just like everyone else. Heck most people here present company included have zero problem voicing their opinions on issues that are often quite far from their comfort zone.
Where my mouth is at is calling out people who think they are more qualified than the members of the BOD of a multi-billion dollar megacorporation which sells more product than anybody else in their industry.
Buying Nokia will not constitute putting my money where my mouth is, unless Nokia puts these guys on their board of directors. In such an event, I will be happy to short Nokia immediately.
Talk is cheap. Especially the anonymous kind.
No, Android is given away to whomever wants it. Strictly speaking, Android is a loss leader for Google to support their other ventures.
You mean, "....loss leader for Google with which they plan to support other ventures."
Wait till they start to monetize it, which they will have to, at some point soon.
No, Android is given away to whomever wants it. Strictly speaking, Android is a loss leader for Google to support their other ventures.
And is unknowingly dumbing down all the cell phone makers in the process who previously developed/wrote/maintained their own OS and/or had multiple phones running under multiple OSes. Thanks to Google they've given all that up... hmmm I wonder whats gonna happen when google tires of Android. After all those pesky 'pet projects' at Google come and go like the wind.
You mean, "....loss leader for Google with which they plan to support other ventures."
Wait till they start to monetize it, which they will have to, at some point soon.
I am puzzled about how Google intend to monetize Android.
We are even seeing Android devices which have Bing as the only search engine!
As far as I can see, Android is neither a loss maker or a profit maker for Google.
C.
You don't seem to have any proof that he can turn things around or that the current board of directors is making a smart decision.
That is because I have no opinion on either of those topics. Indeed, IMO, anybody who hazards a guess on either of those topics is speaking from a position of ignorance.
I wonder whats gonna happen when google tires of Android.
Likely they will sell it for a huge profit. Why would they make any other choice with such a successful venture?
http://events.nokia.com/NokiaN8/
That one factor is not sufficient to make any sort of determination about the bottom line.
That is what I am saying.
I think we all know what you are saying...you are clearly pushing an agenda trying to say vendors should go with Microsoft Phone 7 because they will make more money, when the evidence clearly points to the contrary.
Sell 1,000,000 phones and pay $15 per phone to Microsoft= $15,000,000 to Microsoft and $15,000,000 less in your pocket, OR Sell 1,000,000 phones and $15,000,000 more in your profit column. Again, sounds pretty simple, unless of course you work for Microsoft.
That is because I have no opinion on either of those topics. Indeed, IMO, anybody who hazards a guess on either of those topics is speaking from a position of ignorance.
12th April 1912 - The Titanic sailed through calm waters.
14th April 1912 - 11:40 p.m. - The Titanic Struck the iceberg
15th April 1912\t12:00 a.m. - They engineers insist the ship is unsinkable
15th April 1912\t2.17 am\t - The last radio message was sent. The captain announced 'Every man for himself.
15th April 1912\t2.18 am - They appoint a new captain from Microsoft.
Nokia's survival requires a return to profitability. The low end devices make for plenty of activity but precious little profit.
The only option is to create a new product for the high end. But such a product demands they abandon their current path and create a massively attractive product that appeals to a mass consumer audience.
I don't think this is possible. Because Microsoft, Nokia and Sony all share a common weakness in that product development is led by engineers. The tail should not wag the dog.
C.
This is the the biggest problem Apple ever faced!!
http://events.nokia.com/NokiaN8/
Surely *this* was the biggest problem Apple ever faced?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolog...N97-phone.html
C.
That is because I have no opinion on either of those topics. Indeed, IMO, anybody who hazards a guess on either of those topics is speaking from a position of ignorance.
For a guy who has no opinion on the topic, you have WAY TOO MANY replies to this thread!!!
If so, I wonder how much Ballmer paid Nokia's board members to install Elop.
Either way, it's a win-win situation for Nokia. If Elop can turn around their failed smartphone business, Nokia wins. If Elop runs Nokia's smartphone business into the ground, then at least it wasn't a Finn who killed it.
Brilliant forward thinking by Nokia's board.
12th April 1912 - The Titanic sailed through calm waters.
14th April 1912 - 11:40 p.m. - The Titanic Struck the iceberg
15th April 1912\t12:00 a.m. - They engineers insist the ship is unsinkable
15th April 1912\t2.17 am\t - The last radio message was sent. The captain announced 'Every man for himself.
15th April 1912\t2.18 am - They appoint a new captain from Microsoft.
Nokia's survival requires a return to profitability. The low end devices make for plenty of activity but precious little profit.
The only option is to create a new product for the high end. But such a product demands they abandon their current path and create a massively attractive product that appeals to a mass consumer audience.
I don't think this is possible. Because Microsoft, Nokia and Sony all share a common weakness in that product development is led by engineers. The tail should not wag the dog.
C.
I beg to differ, product development is being led by consensus influenced by what uber geeks wants and not what the ordinary consumer would buy.
Likely they will sell it for a huge profit. Why would they make any other choice with such a successful venture?
Android might have survived, and even flourished, if Google had only stuck to the Java standard. But no, they messed with it and created their own VM. In clear violation of the Java license agreement (and if you're not 100% compliant, you are in violation according the language of the agreement.)
Oracle's lawsuit has merit. Android's near-perfect clone of Java is a perfect violation of the license agreement and Sun has already successfully sued Microsoft for a similar infraction. So let's see: clear evidence of an infraction + legal precedent = conviction.
Larry Ellison won't be taking any out-of-court settlement cash. He wants Android off the market, and that's what he's going to get. Good thing for Google that they have a backup plan in Chrome OS.
Sergey Brin said in public (at Google I/O this past May) that Chrome OS is Google's future. Boy was he right! Give the man a cookie.
I beg to differ, product development is being led by consensus influenced by what uber geeks wants and not what the ordinary consumer would buy.
I sort of agree. But I think the opinions, the values and ultimately the taste of engineers is all too visible in the final products.
The problem with engineers is they are smart and really don't mind complexity and weak aesthetics. It is part of the ability of an engineer to cope with and ignore weak design.
The consumer market is far more sensitive to weak design. Who knew?
C.
Larry Ellison won't be taking any out-of-court settlement cash. He wants Android off the market, and that's what he's going to get.
I assumed Google would just pay a settlement. Why do you think Ellison is going to play tough?
C.
I am puzzled about how Google intend to monetize Android.
We are even seeing Android devices which have Bing as the only search engine!
As far as I can see, Android is neither a loss maker or a profit maker for Google.
C.
That is what their AdMod acquisition was all about. Mobile ads. My guess is, at some point, they will also start to charge a license fee (perhaps for an 'Android-plus' version of some sort).
Also, unless you believe that human capital and R&D is free, it is, at the moment a loss-maker for Google.
Nope. I'm talking about people who have never sat on a BOD of a publicly-traded company, but who nevertheless think that they are more qualified to hire a CEO than those who do.
If the posters on this forum had to be qualified in anything to have an opinion .... we'd never hear from you!
The easy solution is of course to copy Apple. It takes no imagination, and will probably net quick returns.