Will Nokia build Windows phones?

Will Nokia build Windows phones? | VentureBeat.

The chances are extremely small. There are three scenarios where this would make sense:

  1. If there was a specific market that required it. It would also need to be a large opportunity since developing a new platform and diluting existing platforms need significant upside. The only such market is the US, but there are better options available, namely Android that have better potential and Android is treated as a toxin by Nokia (see metaphor).
  2. Specific users. Windows Mobile used to be justified for business users, but Windows Phone is not targeting business users.
  3. The last option would be “strategic” i.e. Microsoft paying Nokia for using the OS (directly or indirectly through marketing co-spend or other symbolisms). I don’t think Nokia is desperate enough yet.

Although it’s never prudent to say never, I just don’t see any logic for Nokia to add to its bill of materials for phones while facing price pressure.

  • Richard

    hi Horace.. slim chance indeed but I'd be interested in your opinion on the converse view. i.e. MS joining the Symbian Foundation?

    • Microsoft joining Symbian is even less likely. Microsoft always promotes own platforms even when the competing alternatives are overwhelming. See Java (vs. .NET), Flash (vs. Silverlight). This is especially so when it comes to operating systems, the most sacred of sacred technology cows. Microsoft never even considered Unix flavors which were widely available to base its next gen OS in the 90s. They picked defunct DEC VMS as a foundation for NT.

      All that is history, but I don't see any change in dogma while Gates/Ballmer are involved in any way.

  • Narayanan

    @Richard- Outside chance, yes, but extending the previous metaphor it will be akin to getting paid to pee in your pants.

  • Tom

    If Nokia and RIMM continue to sell into the business sector in growing numbers, then certainly Microsoft will find some adopters, too. The engadget review of the current wp7 on a samsung prototype pointed out a few weaknesses (no html5 video player, nor YouTube, not even multitasking, not even copy n paste), well, actually, a lot of weaknesses, but, for strengths, it had Zune interface for music (OUCH!), IE for browser (OUCH!), and a whole lot of other good stuff, too. Truly, a strong competitor, right?

  • GoodyBird

    Just red this:

    My question, would MS ever see a return on all of this products?
    (Mainly: WP7, Bing, IE9)

    • Going from not executing to executing well is not turning the tanker around. That's just going from dead stop to moving forward. For Microsoft to "turn the tanker around" they actually need a different direction to go into. That means a new way of making money. None of that changed. Microsoft expects the world to pay for End User License Agreements (EULAs). Whether those are OS EULAs or Office EULAs or Xbox EULAs or WinPhone EULAs it's all the same business model. Search and services are not but they are so small that they don't add up to anything yet.

      I'll agree that Microsoft has "turned around" when I see significant revenues from new business models.

      (By the way, you can look at Apple here for inspiration again, although it makes money from hardware like the Mac, most of its income now comes from hardware that is sold by software (iOS, apps) and content (iTunes) and telecom service (iPhone subsidies).)

      • Shaun

        I'm not sure that's a good example of inspiration. You can't buy a Mac without OSX just as you can't buy an iPad without iOS. Apple is always about hardware AND software, which is a pity in some cases as the software can be pretty crap at launch. See iOS on the iPad for a good example of good hardware let down by poor software. The software usually improves later, sometimes much later. Then again, Samsung seems to want to follow the same stupid mistake putting a phone OS on a tablet.

        However, if Windows Mobile is a tanker then Microsoft has got there by quietly mothballing it's old ship which was arguably much more feature rich, especially for business users, in the pursuit of turning their tanker into a pleasure cruiser.

      • GoodyBird

        The fact that the premise of the article is nonsense is preaty
        clear to me, if I haven't made it clearer.

        I was just using this article as a stock list.

        Anyway there are things I can't understand about MS logics.
        why re-build trident rendering engine to facilitate windows 7
        as a modern browser, when you can use webKit?
        why are they insisting on re-building things that are already built?

  • Shaun

    They'd never use Webkit as-is in a collaborative effort with Apple, Nokia, Adobe, Google and others. Fork it maybe. They want to be in charge of their own destiny and not be beholden to others.

    Plus they've a huge legacy to contend with in compatibility with their old browsers.

    I think it would be unhealthy to lose IE's engine though. Competition has been good forcing Apple and Mozilla to push on.

    It would however make life measurably easier for us web developers.

    • GoodyBird

      Chrome and Safari both succeeded at being competitive to each other and to others. Anyway, whose stopping them [MS] from forking.

      I'm not sure how well does IE9 helps people maintain legacy.
      The ones that are heavily invested in it, keep using IE6.

      It's could be that competition is better for the greater good,
      but we're talking about MS's good here.
      once you accept industry standard as your guidelines, it doesn't matter
      with whom you share your rendering engine.

  • The software on my Nokia is unfriendly enough without making it worse!