the market was MS, Google and Apple. It is now Apple, Google and MS, it soon will be Apple, Google and Samsung as the post PC era destroys the incumbents of the PC era.
LOL at all the Microsoft clone maker "partners". They sold their sole to Microsoft and now get to enjoy the knife in the back like all Microsoft "partners" get in the end.
Oh...they're going to make another Kin! Haha! I thought they didn't want to make hardware and software? Now all of a sudden they're doing it?
Kin was a cluster. that is for sure. A play for the fickle 'adolescent' market. xBox marketing meets TeenBeat.
However, this is more of the 'long game' that well funded companies will take on. It's apparent. Money isn't in end device software anymore. People aren't going to spend $150 for an OS and $150 for an office suite for a license hologram. Money is in the tactile experience and integration of experience into HW and SW. Apple has proven that. You can get the HW markup of 20% and another 20% on brand and experience.
The game shifted to owning a 'layer' to owning a 'vertical', soon it will be 'owning the experience.' Dell and HP are the ones loading crapware. Samsung and Asus are building out their own appstore ecosystems. MS moving to control the point of sale also gets the CC number, the first entree' into enrollment into Office365.com, Outlook.com, Microsoft Money, etc etc etc. Why are the Nexus and the Kindle out there? not to make a HW profit, but to control the eyeballs and the wallets of their installed base. The Kindle is a personal Point of Sale device, and Amazon will evolve that to be a 'gee i like that... Kindle, please buy me one of those....' The Nexus, as much as it is a reference platform, it's also a vector to keep google's ad sales relevant.
Of course they are ... they have to emulate everything Apple does otherwise they are dead in ten years or sooner.
You mean to emulate Google? Apple does not license its OSes to OEM and third parties, so Microsoft is rather going toward the Google Nexus way of reference devices.
the market was MS, Google and Apple. It is now Apple, Google and MS, it soon will be Apple, Google and Samsung as the post PC era destroys the incumbents of the PC era.
Android is 75% of the smartphone market in Q3, iOS 15%. I would reorder that list a bit to stay honest.
I thought they had started a close relationship with Nokia to build their flagship win8 smartphone, it was called Lumia. Or is this report anticipating the purchase of Nokia by MS?
This is actually more like round five than round two. The thing is, everything they release arrives with a gigantic clunk and then doesn't sell. By starting all over again every six months or so they stay in the news. It also allows them to perpetrate the lie that it's somehow the hardware that is at fault, when in fact it's the OS.
The Lumia is good hardware and shows off the new OS as well as any hardware could. The phones are also reasonably cheap. It still didn't sell though. Microsoft may have *some* experience in hardware, but they are hardly top of the heap by any means, and not likely to make a better phone than Nokia or any of their hardware partners.
The idea that MS making their own phone will make any difference to the equation is pretty silly on the face of it. This situation is almost a perfect illustration of Einstein's famous definition of madness (doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results).
So not only was the Lumia 900 really a beta phone, MS treated Nokia like a beta company. I hope Nokia's alliance was a hail mary, because if they had other options, they should have done a better job of exhausting them than being Microsoft's throwaway partner.
I don't recall many complaints about the hardware on the Lumia 920. Exactly what do they hope to do to raise the WP8 turkey from the ashes?
The Nokia hardware is first rate. Better than Motorola, Samsung, or HTC. It is possible Microsoft would do a Google like Nexus arrangement. Where it would market the phone itself, but allow a hardware partner to manufacture it. I suspect that is what Microsoft would do. Nokia will build it. Microsoft will name and market it.
You mean to emulate Google? Apple does not license its OSes to OEM and third parties, so Microsoft is rather going toward the Google Nexus way of reference devices.
MS doesn't license its XBox OS, so it wouldn't be totally unprecedented that they just take it all in-house. The sooner they take ownership of the idea that the UI is a turn-off, not the hardware, the sooner they can turn their problem around.
It may be that the Windows Phone brand is toast. Just take a look at the Lumia 900 ad, where they told us it wasn't a "beta" phone, despite the fact they quickly discontinued the model and the hardware can't run an OS released only three months later.
The Nokia hardware is first rate. Better than Motorola, Samsung, or HTC. It is possible Microsoft would do a Google like Nexus arrangement. Where it would market the phone itself, but allow a hardware partner to manufacture it. I suspect that is what Microsoft would do. Nokia will build it. Microsoft will name and market it.
Really? The 900 was announced in March 2012 and can't run WP8, which was announced only a few months later. The processor isn't up for it and the screen resolution was behind the times. If you're talking about the 920, then OK, but knowing the 900 debacle, is there any reason to trust MS or Nokia again?
The 900 being mechanically solid and properly functioning is one thing, but being out of date in three months is a bit of an insult, especially with the "not a beta" ad they ran.
Oh...they're going to make another Kin! Haha! I thought they didn't want to make hardware and software? Now all of a sudden they're doing it?
Personally, I would put the Kin in the same boat as WebOS from HP, which is to say they aren't necessarily a failure because they were both knifed in their cribs. The few times Microsoft actually does design something nice they typically drop it like a hot potato for what usually turns out to be some bullshit financial reason that makes no sense when looked at even a week later.
Kin, Zune etc. were never really given a chance, so in fact, we don't know how they would have faired.
The Nokia hardware is first rate. Better than Motorola, Samsung, or HTC. It is possible Microsoft would do a Google like Nexus arrangement. Where it would market the phone itself, but allow a hardware partner to manufacture it. I suspect that is what Microsoft would do. Nokia will build it. Microsoft will name and market it.
It's junk. It looks like junk and feels like it.
Microsoft/Nokia keeps announcing new phones as part of a smartphone platform in which no one is really interested.
This is actually more like round five than round two. The thing is, everything they release arrives with a gigantic clunk and then doesn't sell. By starting all over again every six months or so they stay in the news. It also allows them to perpetrate the lie that it's somehow the hardware that is at fault, when in fact it's the OS.
The Lumia is good hardware and shows off the new OS as well as any hardware could. The phones are also reasonably cheap. It still didn't sell though. Microsoft may have *some* experience in hardware, but they are hardly top of the heap by any means, and not likely to make a better phone than Nokia or any of their hardware partners.
The idea that MS making their own phone will make any difference to the equation is pretty silly on the face of it. This situation is almost a perfect illustration of Einstein's famous definition of madness (doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results).
Microsoft makes hardware and has done so for years. It makes the XBox and numerous computer peripherals. Moreover, Oprah an acknowledged Apple fan just made the Surface one of her favorite things.
So, Nokia has great hardware, and Microsoft's OS is pretty good. I'd take an Windows Phone over Android. We are seeing what happens when Microsoft has to compete fairly. In the PC market, Microsoft was essentially handed IBM's market.
Microsoft's problem now is 1) small application store, 2) lack of partners willing to support the OS, and 3) it doesn't control the retail experience. All this is ironic because Microsoft used to tell people to buy Windows over Macs because of the lack of applications. Sales people used to push people to Windows machines for the same reason. It is going to cost Microsoft a lot of money to gain ground unless it can start exploiting some other assets it has like the XBox.
Microsoft also seems to be under the impression people actually liked Windows as opposed to put up with it. They should have kept Metro as the products name or came up with something better.
Microsoft/Nokia keeps announcing new phones as part of a smartphone platform in which no one is really interested.
I own three iPhones, and am an Apple fan. With that said, I have actually used the Nokia Lumina (the metal one in blue) and it is not junk. It has a better build quality than Samsung, HTC, and Motorola top phones.
Part of Nokia's problem is Microsoft. Many of the relatively recent phones aren't even going to be upgradable to the new OS.
Comments
LOL at all the Microsoft clone maker "partners". They sold their sole to Microsoft and now get to enjoy the knife in the back like all Microsoft "partners" get in the end.
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress
Oh...they're going to make another Kin! Haha! I thought they didn't want to make hardware and software? Now all of a sudden they're doing it?
Kin was a cluster. that is for sure. A play for the fickle 'adolescent' market. xBox marketing meets TeenBeat.
However, this is more of the 'long game' that well funded companies will take on. It's apparent. Money isn't in end device software anymore. People aren't going to spend $150 for an OS and $150 for an office suite for a license hologram. Money is in the tactile experience and integration of experience into HW and SW. Apple has proven that. You can get the HW markup of 20% and another 20% on brand and experience.
The game shifted to owning a 'layer' to owning a 'vertical', soon it will be 'owning the experience.' Dell and HP are the ones loading crapware. Samsung and Asus are building out their own appstore ecosystems. MS moving to control the point of sale also gets the CC number, the first entree' into enrollment into Office365.com, Outlook.com, Microsoft Money, etc etc etc. Why are the Nexus and the Kindle out there? not to make a HW profit, but to control the eyeballs and the wallets of their installed base. The Kindle is a personal Point of Sale device, and Amazon will evolve that to be a 'gee i like that... Kindle, please buy me one of those....' The Nexus, as much as it is a reference platform, it's also a vector to keep google's ad sales relevant.
My guess: First the Surface, then you'll see a Microsoft 'Air' laptop, and then you'll see the phone, once MS kills Nokia. (remember all MS mobile partnerships here:--> http://www.asymco.com/2011/02/11/in-memoriam-microsofts-previous-strategic-mobile-partners/ ). The Surface (atom vs arm) battle will determine the phone app architecture, hence the delay.
http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/02/idc-android-market-share-reached-75-worldwide-in-q3-2012/
Quote:
Originally Posted by mac-user
I thought they had started a close relationship with Nokia to build their flagship win8 smartphone, it was called Lumia. Or is this report anticipating the purchase of Nokia by MS?
This is actually more like round five than round two. The thing is, everything they release arrives with a gigantic clunk and then doesn't sell. By starting all over again every six months or so they stay in the news. It also allows them to perpetrate the lie that it's somehow the hardware that is at fault, when in fact it's the OS.
The Lumia is good hardware and shows off the new OS as well as any hardware could. The phones are also reasonably cheap. It still didn't sell though. Microsoft may have *some* experience in hardware, but they are hardly top of the heap by any means, and not likely to make a better phone than Nokia or any of their hardware partners.
The idea that MS making their own phone will make any difference to the equation is pretty silly on the face of it. This situation is almost a perfect illustration of Einstein's famous definition of madness (doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results).
Check actual usage stats. Where are all these Android phones being used?
The Nokia hardware is first rate. Better than Motorola, Samsung, or HTC. It is possible Microsoft would do a Google like Nexus arrangement. Where it would market the phone itself, but allow a hardware partner to manufacture it. I suspect that is what Microsoft would do. Nokia will build it. Microsoft will name and market it.
MS doesn't license its XBox OS, so it wouldn't be totally unprecedented that they just take it all in-house. The sooner they take ownership of the idea that the UI is a turn-off, not the hardware, the sooner they can turn their problem around.
It may be that the Windows Phone brand is toast. Just take a look at the Lumia 900 ad, where they told us it wasn't a "beta" phone, despite the fact they quickly discontinued the model and the hardware can't run an OS released only three months later.
Originally Posted by Sensi
Usage stats? Care to elaborate?
Stats is short for "statistics" and usage means…
Really, what's confusing here?
Really? The 900 was announced in March 2012 and can't run WP8, which was announced only a few months later. The processor isn't up for it and the screen resolution was behind the times. If you're talking about the 920, then OK, but knowing the 900 debacle, is there any reason to trust MS or Nokia again?
The 900 being mechanically solid and properly functioning is one thing, but being out of date in three months is a bit of an insult, especially with the "not a beta" ad they ran.
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress
Oh...they're going to make another Kin! Haha! I thought they didn't want to make hardware and software? Now all of a sudden they're doing it?
Personally, I would put the Kin in the same boat as WebOS from HP, which is to say they aren't necessarily a failure because they were both knifed in their cribs. The few times Microsoft actually does design something nice they typically drop it like a hot potato for what usually turns out to be some bullshit financial reason that makes no sense when looked at even a week later.
Kin, Zune etc. were never really given a chance, so in fact, we don't know how they would have faired.
Because Nokia is a sinking ship that can't get its shit together and/or because MS *loves* shafting their partners.
Pick your poison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensi
Usage stats? Care to elaborate?
I think they are referring to the fact that these are 'shipped' phones, which does not necessarily mean that they're all in end user hands.
A better measure of share is to look at the stats on popular websites. These are phones that are actually in use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
The Nokia hardware is first rate. Better than Motorola, Samsung, or HTC. It is possible Microsoft would do a Google like Nexus arrangement. Where it would market the phone itself, but allow a hardware partner to manufacture it. I suspect that is what Microsoft would do. Nokia will build it. Microsoft will name and market it.
It's junk. It looks like junk and feels like it.
Microsoft/Nokia keeps announcing new phones as part of a smartphone platform in which no one is really interested.
Microsoft makes hardware and has done so for years. It makes the XBox and numerous computer peripherals. Moreover, Oprah an acknowledged Apple fan just made the Surface one of her favorite things.
So, Nokia has great hardware, and Microsoft's OS is pretty good. I'd take an Windows Phone over Android. We are seeing what happens when Microsoft has to compete fairly. In the PC market, Microsoft was essentially handed IBM's market.
Microsoft's problem now is 1) small application store, 2) lack of partners willing to support the OS, and 3) it doesn't control the retail experience. All this is ironic because Microsoft used to tell people to buy Windows over Macs because of the lack of applications. Sales people used to push people to Windows machines for the same reason. It is going to cost Microsoft a lot of money to gain ground unless it can start exploiting some other assets it has like the XBox.
Microsoft also seems to be under the impression people actually liked Windows as opposed to put up with it. They should have kept Metro as the products name or came up with something better.
I own three iPhones, and am an Apple fan. With that said, I have actually used the Nokia Lumina (the metal one in blue) and it is not junk. It has a better build quality than Samsung, HTC, and Motorola top phones.
Part of Nokia's problem is Microsoft. Many of the relatively recent phones aren't even going to be upgradable to the new OS.