Another Nokia "Normandy" Android phone image leaked

A few weeks ago, rumors about Nokia actively developing an Android smartphone hit the Internet, followed later on by leaked images of the product. Now a new photo of the alleged device has found its way to the web.

The newly leaked photo of the smartphone, which reportedly has the code name "Normandy", was posted this week by Chinese website WPDang. Much of the phone's display has been blurred and there's no Nokia logo, but the new image seems to match up pretty well compared to the other leaked photos.

Some people think that Nokia won't be allowed to release "Normandy" by Microsoft, due to their impending purchase of the Finland company's Devices and Services division. However, known Internet gadget news leaker "@evleaks", who has posted some earlier images of "Normandy", seems to claim in a recent Twitter message that the phone may not be a dead end after all.

Microsoft is expected to complete the purchase of Nokia's smartphone business by the end of the first quarter of 2014.

Source: WPDang via WPCentral | Image via WPDang

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Skype blogs still down a day after defacement by hackers

Next Story

Microsoft upgrades Surface Pro 2 CPU, but is there more to the story?

36 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Make Windows phone compatible with Android apps? Yeah, Google will jump at the opportunity for that to be allowed.

the android os is free and open to customization, google wouldn't have any say in the matter if ms did want to run it on nt

Tegument said,
the android os is free and open to customization, google wouldn't have any say in the matter if ms did want to run it on nt

99% of the value of Android devices is the Google Play Store/Google Apps both of which require Google's permission to use. So sure MS can make Windows Phone run Android apps, but if it can't access the Play store then there's no point.

amazon seems to be doing ok w/ their version of android on the fire but haven't used one much myself to really know what apps are and aren't available

Tegument said,
amazon seems to be doing ok w/ their version of android on the fire but haven't used one much myself to really know what apps are and aren't available

It's still an authorised version of Android. Hence they can use it. If they had a tablet with WP8 on it, they wouldn't be allowed to access it.

Nashy said,

It's still an authorised version of Android. Hence they can use it. If they had a tablet with WP8 on it, they wouldn't be allowed to access it.

No it isn't. Amazon has their own android app store. Not Google Play.

SharpGreen said,

No it isn't. Amazon has their own android app store. Not Google Play.

Learn something new every day. Only strengthens my argument though.

Nashy said,

Learn something new every day. Only strengthens my argument though.


Not really. Your arguement (as I understood it, feel free to laugh and tell me I'm wrong) was based on Google allowing it. Google has no say in Amazon's Android fork, just as they wouldn't in an MS fork that didn't use Google's first party apps (incl. the play store)

SharpGreen said,

Not really. Your arguement (as I understood it, feel free to laugh and tell me I'm wrong) was based on Google allowing it. Google has no say in Amazon's Android fork, just as they wouldn't in an MS fork that didn't use Google's first party apps (incl. the play store)

Quite right. My original argument however, was that Google wouldn't allow the play store on Windows Phone whatever version.

Nashy said,

Quite right. My original argument however, was that Google wouldn't allow the play store on Windows Phone whatever version.


Oh. Well see, I did read it wrong

myxomatosis said,
I would buy a Nokia Android phone.

Me too. I love Windows Phone, but if I can get Nokia build quality, and an operating system that is updated more than once every 2 years, I'd buy it.

windows phone 8 is on its 3rd update now since being released with a further major update coming in several months...but you have to be kidding me with saying android and update in the same sentence, such stupidity.

korupt_one said,
windows phone 8 is on its 3rd update now since being released with a further major update coming in several months...but you have to be kidding me with saying android and update in the same sentence, such stupidity.

Such stupidity? I don't know if I take offence, or if I should call you a hypocrite, really.

I'm not sure if you've noticed this or not, I have given I'm on my third WP8 device. But WP8 is missing some very major features. It's well documented if you'd like to have a look.

The problem I have, it has taken far too long for Microsoft to release a major update. To suggest I'm wrong in that regard, is your opinion.

Let's look. Since WP8 was released, we have seen:

Android 4.2 JB
4.2.1
4.2.2
Android 4.3 JB
Android 4.4 KK
4.4.1
4.4.2

Windows Phone:

GDR1 - Minor Update
GDR2
GDR3

Over 12 months ago they released this OS. By now, I expected to have simple things like a notification centre, function shortcuts, and proper notifications and volume control.

This OS is so far behind.

OH NO! A phone icon that is green! Didn't Apple sue Samsung claiming that Samsung stole the color green? Nokia dodged a bullet and saved themselves being dragged through court for that blatant rip-off of Apple's intellectual property.

Um, Nokia had the green answer icon on their buttons since the '80's
stuff like the 101 and such... (God now I feel old lol)

(edit
Actually they go back further than the 101, I just found some nokia housebricks using a green answer, using a search engine)

Edited by Aheer.R.S., Jan 2 2014, 9:25pm :

Does it matter? This is Apple's exclusive right to use the color green for phone icons, and anyone who tries to infringe upon this must pay dearly.

Apple did sue Samsung for this, and it is completely ridiculous. But it is just another case of Apple thinking everyone is copying from them and owes them for everything in the computer world, when, if what you say is true (and I have no reason to think otherwise) Nokia did it long before Apple did.

WhatTheSchmidt said,
OH NO! A phone icon that is green! Didn't Apple sue Samsung claiming that Samsung stole the color green? Nokia dodged a bullet and saved themselves being dragged through court for that blatant rip-off of Apple's intellectual property.

Samsung copied almost every icon and even the packaging and connectors. That's why they got sued.

WhatTheSchmidt said,
Does it matter? This is Apple's exclusive right to use the color green for phone icons, and anyone who tries to infringe upon this must pay dearly.

Apple did sue Samsung for this, and it is completely ridiculous. But it is just another case of Apple thinking everyone is copying from them and owes them for everything in the computer world, when, if what you say is true (and I have no reason to think otherwise) Nokia did it long before Apple did.


+1 for a diplomatic response,
Unfortunately, unlike the forums, I cannot post a picture here to 'back up' my claim
and for that lack of evidence, I apologise

WhatTheSchmidt said,
OH NO! A phone icon that is green! Didn't Apple sue Samsung claiming that Samsung stole the color green?

No, they were fighting over almost identical phone icons... a white phone on a green background.

This is clearly a green phone on a transparent background. Other than being phone shaped, they are nothing alike.

rfirth said,

No, they were fighting over almost identical phone icons... a white phone on a green background.

This is clearly a green phone on a transparent background. Other than being phone shaped, they are nothing alike.

So somebody using the colors green deserves to be sued? Over and over again, when someone on Neowin makes the claim that Apple copies other companies, then we hear about how it is not that bad, everyone copies, it should happen because it makes computers for everyone better, and so on. Apple copies the look of Sweedish clocks. They copy the names of products (the iPhone being a perfect example). They copy the UI of a calculator. They copied greatly from Metro.

But one company that has an icon that looks similar to another's and that should not be allowed?

"Good artists copy, but great artists steal"

WhatTheSchmidt said,

Apple copies the look of Sweedish clocks. They copy the names of products (the iPhone being a perfect example). They copy the UI of a calculator. They copied greatly from Metro.

The iPhone is/was an LG Prada to begin with. ios7 is Metro after being dragged through a .

Edited by zhangm, Jan 3 2014, 2:29am :

Nokia made the right choice going with WP, only Samsung is making any money on Android phones. MS actually makes alot also on Android because of license fee's but that is about it. Android is not a magic bullet for profits.

techbeck said,
There are several OEMs making a profit from Android. Samsung is the biggest but I feel their bubble is about to pop.

If their Android bubble pops, Samsung already has plans to make WP their flagship.

Even if the bubble doesn't pop and WP continues to gain marketshare, Samsung has said they would like to offer it on their main phone/tablet OS.

You can have two flagship phones with different platforms. Samsung will continue to have flagship Android devices and it wouldnt be smart to abandon the group that made them popular.

Here's a thought:

The android runtime (Davorik, isn't it?) is just a VM that sits on top of the Linux system.

The Windows 8 .net stack is just a runtime that sits on top of the NT kernel.

What if Normandy is a Microsoft approved project to put Windows apps on the Android system? If Samsung adds a "value added" .net runtime on the GS5, all of a sudden you have Google Android apps vs non-google Android apps vs Windows Phone apps vs Samsung GS5 apps.

When you're so far behind, an up-end like that can only be beneficial.

Actually, you make a good point, what if this is just their way of building a windows phone compatible with android apps, lets face it, their store, just like apple's, is already established, and then they can simply make android responsible for the apps and updates and such...

greenwizard88 said,
Here's a thought:

The android runtime (Davorik, isn't it?) is just a VM that sits on top of the Linux system.

The Windows 8 .net stack is just a runtime that sits on top of the NT kernel.

What if Normandy is a Microsoft approved project to put Windows apps on the Android system? If Samsung adds a "value added" .net runtime on the GS5, all of a sudden you have Google Android apps vs non-google Android apps vs Windows Phone apps vs Samsung GS5 apps.

When you're so far behind, an up-end like that can only be beneficial.

Doing so would be a great move for MS, because now developers would be more likely to port to C#/.net since it would also port it to Android at the same time.

Quite the opposite of what Blackberry did (and it killed them since most Android devs just figured if there was ever a need for a BB10 port they could just "compile" it with the proper support (most of them never bothered since the device didn't take off)

greenwizard88 said,
Here's a thought:

The android runtime (Davorik, isn't it?) is just a VM that sits on top of the Linux system.

The Windows 8 .net stack is just a runtime that sits on top of the NT kernel.

What if Normandy is a Microsoft approved project to put Windows apps on the Android system? If Samsung adds a "value added" .net runtime on the GS5, all of a sudden you have Google Android apps vs non-google Android apps vs Windows Phone apps vs Samsung GS5 apps.

When you're so far behind, an up-end like that can only be beneficial.

Technically it would be easier to throw the Android JVM on NT than it would be to put the WP CLR on Android/Linux.

NT was designed to use the client\server kernel model to host additional subsystems. Which allows for a full OS to sit on top of NT without using virtualization technologies.

The Android kernel (Linux) doesn't have the features to directly host the WP runtime, so they would have to add a lot of lower level support features between the kernel and the runtime. (Basically NT is doing things that Linux doesn't and these would have to be recreated.)


If they do, then they do.
I remember thousands of Chinese knock off Nokia N8's appearing all over amazon and ebay (ok they were removed quite quickly as well but it proved they existed)

As a business, they need to make decisions to maximise their income/profit, and if this device is indeed genuine, I'd be interested to know about it's specs, alongside camera tech etc...

Yeah, but people shouldn't expect any official support for long if they do I guess. It could be a great XDA developers phone though.