57 replies to this topic 3 votes

[pwgarner]

Boz, on 31 July 2012 - 18:32, said:

Sadly I'd have to agree.. they are looking more and more like RIM.



it has nothing to do with Android and everything to do with companies themselves. Samsung seems to be breaking all kinds of records and outselling Apple 2-to-1 with MONSTER profits thanks to Android. So the point is moot. It just shows it's not Android, it's the company making the hardware.

Nokia is more like Samsung rather than HTC.

Silly talk! MS gave Nokia billions of dollars!! That was the important aspect of this relationship. Google chose Moto as a partner, Apple is Apple and Nokia has who to work with? Nokia needs a marketing campaign to stay afloat. Word of mouth is not good enough anymore. Apple advertises like crazy and so does Samsung. We see their commercials all the time. Nokia had the beta test ads and then stopped after about a month. They need to put more money or effort into the phones they want people to buy. A huge marketing blitz on TV not the "smoked" stuff for at least 6 months and I think we would see the needle move.

[still1]

Gaffney, on 31 July 2012 - 19:14, said:

Erm what? That's like saying Apple killed iOS 3. Microsoft isn't killing anything, they are adding support for newer hardware. WP8 add support for hardware, WP7.8 adds software updates.

Wp7 is a platform like IOS but IOS 3 is a version of the platform.

wp7(All version are not getting updated to wp8 platform) underlying kernel and architecture changes

IOS 3 is still in IOS platform and latest IOS 5 is still on IOS platform...
also IOS3 has been updated to IOS 5 unlike just getting wp7.8

[the better twin]

Boz, on 31 July 2012 - 18:32, said:

Sadly I'd have to agree.. they are looking more and more like RIM.



it has nothing to do with Android and everything to do with companies themselves. Samsung seems to be breaking all kinds of records and outselling Apple 2-to-1 with MONSTER profits thanks to Android. So the point is moot. It just shows it's not Android, it's the company making the hardware.

Nokia is more like Samsung rather than HTC.

No Nokia is not like Samsung they simply do not have the capacity to pump out endless phones like Samsung and I also question their ability to compete with Samsung's Amoled screens.
There is no evidence to support the suggestion that Nokia would be doing any better running Android would the pureview sell any better running Android and would the Lumia 900 really compete with the Samsung Galaxy S3?
Let's not forget that MS has invested heavily in Nokia which has helped to stem the tide somewhat at least until the true test (WP8) comes out. Additionally where does this notion come from that people are always asking for Android phone the experience I and many other people have is that they ask for the latest HTC or the latest Samsung most people couldn't give two craps about Android.

[+techbeck]

Nokia would have had to of switched to Android much sooner in order to have any chance. Now they have a lot of companies to compete against.

[wv@gt]

Nokia is far from finished in my opinion. In the US they may look down, but man when I was in the mid-east last month everyone that didn't have a smartphone had a Nokia. The biggest thing right now for them is trying to find their place again. Personally I love the Lumia Series phones, and its easy to say they are not doing well when you look at the dominating force behing the iPhone and Android markets. Nokia is playing it right with Windows Phone because it allows them to differentiate themselves. How well do you all really think they would have done competing with the Galaxy SIII if they had gone Android, I would venture to say worse off than they are now.

[+techbeck]

wv@gt, on 31 July 2012 - 20:34, said:

How well do you all really think they would have done competing with the Galaxy SIII if they had gone Android, I would venture to say worse off than they are now.

Would be hard now for Nokia to enter the Android market considering how dominate Samsung is. If Nokia started with Android around the same time, then it would be a different story.

[GP007]

Not this tired argument again, how many times do we have to bring it up? It's like someone on here has a hard time letting go or moving on. Nokia made it's choice, deal with it. If they sink or swim what do people really care? Companies come and go. Nokias stock went up 11% today, but yeah, they're oh so dead.

[simplezz]

Elop didn't even give MeeGo a chance, that was the problem. The N9 was a much better phone than the Lumia series, and that was almost purely down to the OS. But as Elop said himself - even if the N9 is successful, we'll still drop it. What a CEO!

[still1]

GP007, on 31 July 2012 - 20:45, said:

Not this tired argument again, how many times do we have to bring it up? It's like someone on here has a hard time letting go or moving on. Nokia made it's choice, deal with it. If they sink or swim what do people really care? Companies come and go. Nokias stock went up 11% today, but yeah, they're oh so dead.

why cant you let it go?? people who want to argue about it let them argue... people here made their choice deal with it.

[GP007]

still1, on 31 July 2012 - 20:49, said:

why cant you let it go?? people who want to argue about it let them argue... people here made their choice deal with it.

U mad bro? I'm not the one making threads over this and always bringing it up am I? How about you try to find someone else to attack?

[simplezz]

.Neo, on 31 July 2012 - 17:33, said:

The main problem with Windows Phone is its name. Microsoft singlehandedly destroyed the reputation of both the Windows Mobile/Phone and Internet Explorer brands. People simply aren't quick to forget what happened in the recent past.

While I do agree that the brand names Windows and IE are tarnished and nigh on worthless these days, I don't think the whole failure of WP can be blamed just on the name. Clearly the metro/tile UI isn't resonating with consumers either.

.Neo, on 31 July 2012 - 17:33, said:

The company could have had a fresh start by calling it Metro Phone with a different logo and a proper international launch. They failed at doing both and screwed up on many levels. Real shame and quite frankly unbelievable for a company the size of Microsoft.

A new name would help, but I still think the metro/tile UI is terrible. It just looks fugly compared to the beautiful ICS/JB UI. I know beauty is subjective, but once you've used an ICS Android device, it's impossible to use WP.

.Neo, on 31 July 2012 - 17:33, said:

So far I'm absolutely loving my Nokia Lumia 900 and the Windows Phone experience. I have no plans buying a Nokia phone again if they decide to switch to Android.

That sounds like a fanboyish response to me. How can you dismiss all future Nokia devices simply because they run Android? I would never dismiss future Microsoft mobile OS's completely. If they improve enough and get good, of course I'll give them a try. I love Android and FOSS software, but not to the point that I'm xenophobic of other OS's just for the sake of fanboyism.

[still1]

GP007, on 31 July 2012 - 20:53, said:

U mad bro? I'm not the one making threads over this and always bringing it up am I? How about you try to find someone else to attack?

Thats the same question I asked you on your previous comment(not literally)

if you cant let go people discussing this topic you cant say people to let go the discussion..
I am not trying to attack you but just trying to make my point about ur statement.. if people want to discuss let them discuss

[Max Norris]

simplezz, on 31 July 2012 - 20:56, said:

A new name would help, but I still think the metro/tile UI is terrible. It just looks fugly compared to the beautiful ICS/JB UI. I know beauty is subjective, but once you've used an ICS Android device, it's impossible to use WP.

Purely opinion of course but strongly disagree here. I have several ICS devices.. and I flat out love my Lumia 900, nothing "impossible" about it. In fact, I'd go and say it actually looks better just for consistency, something which Android has issues with. The underlying OS itself is pretty, I'll give it that, but trying to get all the icons, gadgets, etc to look uniform.. now that's near impossible.

simplezz, on 31 July 2012 - 20:56, said:

hat sounds like a fanboyish response to me. How can you dismiss all future Nokia devices simply because they run Android?

Again, just my own opinion and can't speak for him, but that's the reason I bought the Lumia in the first place. I didn't want the "yet another Android" phone. If Nokia goes that route, it's likely to be the last one I'd buy too as there's a crapton of Androids out there and the odds of me picking theirs specifically just went way down.

[Enron]

Another one of these topics? Can you please stick to the original thread instead of making so many of them?

[Dushmany]

I might have stayed Loyal to Nokia if they considered an Andriod OS Phone, I'm not hating on Nokia, it's the only phone make I have ever used consistently in my 20 years of buying phones, I've had the odd Motorola here, the odd Sony there, but always ended up going back, I would like to make it clear I Absolutely LOVED my N8, and asked my Provider (O2 UK) for another N8 as my upgrade, was told no as the device is now obsolete, then asked if I could just extend my warranty if I renewed my contract but kept my old device, was told no again, I know that there are many users that didn't like Symbian, but personally I've never had any problems with it, the only reason I didn't buy a Lumia was because something in the back of my mind kept telling my it's not a great idea, (not that there's anything wrong with Lumia, it just wasn't for me,) then Samsung Smashed me in the face with the S3 and OMG! yes the HTC is a better device but seeing as I convinced O2 to give me the S3 for free (19 years with the same provider, regardless of their countless name changes) I'm not complaining.

But just imagine, with how good Nokia Displays are, and not to mention their build quality, a Nokia Lumia type device running Android...
(I admit, it's not for everyone.)