Microsoft's book welcoming Nokia employees is beautiful and full of history

London-based media company The Church of London was approached by Microsoft in late 2013. They were tasked with crafting a brand book for Nokia and Microsoft employees in celebration of the recent acquisition of Nokia's Devices and Services division. The book itself contains archived photography as well as some original illustrations throughout. The end result is a colourful presentation of ideas and values shared by both parties.

Covering the history of Nokia and Microsoft in their early days, the book runs through historical achievements, principles and even contains an illustrated notebook, designed for employees to 'write the future' of the newly formed Microsoft. There are numerous facts and fun pointers to keep everything informal, which was the main goal for the media company.

Even the design of the book cover itself is an interesting feature. From afar one would consider the book to have been printed back in 1950, but analyzing the design closely will reveal some hidden elements that really fit in with the text and imagery inside. The team behind the book also opted to use illustrations over the original photographs to achieve high quality results (there were noLumia 1020 handsets back in the 90s).

It's a beautiful book to remember how both Microsoft and Nokia have changed the world so far, and how the newly merged tech giant aims to add more chapters full of soon-to-be-history.

Source: The Church of London, via: Creative Review

Rich Edmonds
Senior Editor, PC Build

Rich Edmonds was formerly a Senior Editor of PC hardware at Windows Central, covering everything related to PC components and NAS. He's been involved in technology for more than a decade and knows a thing or two about the magic inside a PC chassis. You can follow him on Twitter at @RichEdmonds.

  • Nice way to welcome...
  • Classy.
  • Funny...again Rich talks about a merger between Nokia and Microsoft. I wonder in which alternate reality that happened because it wasn't in this one...
    Once again, lack of accuracy is bad journalism. And bad journalism is bad. The concert is pretty though.
  • Merger and acquisition are widely used interchangably.
  • He's talking about only Nokia devices division being acquired, there was no merger with Nokia itself.
  • Exactly.
  • So where did the Nokia division go? Spooky.
  • Rich, you continue to write inaccurate articles and refuse to correct your old articles and it is a shame! Microsoft did not acquire Nokia and to link to your poorly titled and misleading article just shows how little you care about your readers. You could have atleast changed the title of the old article to actually be true. Nokia did not merge with Microsoft either. Nokia's Devices and Services division was sold to Microsoft, Nokia was not merged, sold, acquired or bought by Microsoft. You would rather write your own opinion of what occured with the sale and purchase of Nokia's Devices and Services division instead of taking the time to write a few words that woudl make the sentence clear, concise and true. I honestly KNEW you wrote the article the moment I saw the word MERGER when referring to the deal between Microsoft and Nokia......and that is spooky.
  • you need a chill pill dude
  • Why? I'm not upset, I posted a comment just as you did and if you have an issue with me commenting about the accuracy of what I read on WPC, then I think you need to examine your own expectations of what you deem as acceptable journalism. If reading innacurate articles is ok for you, that is good for you but that doesn't mean that is ok for everyone else. Hmmmmmm.......I may be mistaken but I don't recall seeing you tell Rich, "you need a chill pill dude" when he writes innaccurate articles concerning the MS and Nokia D&S deal....
  • Angry or not 'db' just means you're taking this a bit to serious.  The whole lot of you whiners are.
  • So you are not serious about the accuracy of the information that you read? I don't like to be misinformed and I especially don't like others to be misinformed when they trust the informatiopn that WPC (or any site) provides. Maybe you should stop thinking about yourself and think about others. "Whiners"
  • I'm not saying you're right, or wrong. I'm just saying you need to relax ;) It's not good for your health. It's a petty issue anyway.
  • I am not sure if the original article said 'Nokia devices and services division' originally, but that was clear enough for me.  After he states 'Nokia' only, but since the article open correctly I am sure he is assuming that the reader is intelligent enough to figure it out thereafter.  It is clear enough for me.   I also agree with 'db' its petty.
  • Rich updated the article to have the correct wording after other readers pointed out the inaccurate info. The original wording spoke of a merger between Microsoft and Nokia. Pointing out the truth isn't petty when you are dealing with readers and concerning a writer's responsibility to write accurately. Readers believe what they read and that's why readers like Rex Endozo actually think Microsoft bought Nokia. I don't find it petty to help readers (and writers) be informed and not mislead. If it was you, I'd put the same effort to ensure you were not mislead and to help to the best of my ability.
  • I'm stuck on Amber. F*ck Claro Argentina!
  • Agree with you.
  • So I "continue to write inaccurate articles", yet you're only able to provide a single example. Now, that article in question, the one you're referring to, was actually checked over by not myself, but others on the Mobile Nations team too. Not only that, but it's a seriously highlighted article, which was featured multiple times on our own website, overseen by none other than Daniel Rubino. If it was indeed incorrect and a poorly worded title, why was it not addressed? We're not afraid to fix issues post-publishing and we do sometimes get things wrong, so how come that one slipped through? I guess we're all wrong here and should simply cease typing words? I'd love for you to alert me to other articles I've been seriously misleading the reader - honestly, I would actually appreciate that effort. Let me use some CAPITALS to put MY POINT across to YOU now. It was not my opinion on the sale of Nokia's division to Microsoft, but how I worded it in the context of employees coming together and focusing on products under Microsoft's umbrella. I would say that's the merging of Nokia's awesome devices team and the clever folk at Microsoft. Would that not be a merging of brilliance? combine: to combine or unite with something to form a single entity, or make two or more things do this blend: to blend, or make two or more things blend, gradually Some food for thought. As for this article: I have added a few more words simply because I'm truly, madly and deeply in love with you all. Do I believe I'm incorrect? Possibly, depending on how you read the sentence. Do I do anything on purpose? Absolutely not. Remember: the majority of content you read on Mobile Nations is often proof read.
  • Struck a nerve it seems.  
  • Not at all. I don't rise to comments ;-) Been doing this way too long to know that. But keep trying. I enjoy reading through them all.
  • Thank you for your reply. Let me be clear, as I was not in my comment about inaccurate articles that you have written: In one of your other articles where you have clearly written that Microsoft has acquired Nokia, I stated that you write inaccurate articles "concerning the topic of the Nokia D&S sale to Microsoft." That is what I am referring to when I say "continue to write inaccurate articles". I apologize for not being clear on my post above but unless I have missed it, this is your first response to me and if you would have written this response earlier in your other articles, we could have spoken about it. In many of your articles that even mention the Nokia Devices and Services sale to Microsoft, you have stated that Microsoft acquired/bought/merged with Nokia or in some form of fashion, stated that Nokia is a part of Microsoft now and that is not true or accurate. It isn't just the one article in question. The article in question is commonly mentioned because the headline, the first thing readers read is simply wrong. No way around it. Microsoft did not acquire Nokia. It doesn't matter if everyone in the world read it, and since you put Daniel's name out there, it doesn't matter if it was overseen by Daniel, it is stll not true. Microsoft did not acquire Nokia. I am not the only one that has been bringing this to your attention in the articles where you have incorrectly stated that as a fact. I even brought it to Daniel's attention once and I don't recall seeing a reply. It doesn't matter what Mobile Nations, Daniel or your opinion or even my opinion is, if you are writing something that isn't true, it isn't true. Don't ask me why your incorrect title wasn't addressed. You are the author of the article, your readers pointed it out to you on multiple occasions, even some of your readers believed your title which caused other readers to defend the truth and yet the misleading title still stands. The question is, how come you, your team, and Daniel (since you put his name in the hat) don't understand that saying Microsoft acquired Nokia is not true, that it is wrong, that it is misleading? Nokia's Devices and Services division does not equal Nokia, no matter our opinion. You wrote: "Let me use some CAPITALS to put MY POINT across to YOU now. It was not my opinion on the sale of Nokia's division to Microsoft" In that sentence, you are correct, "Nokia's division" as in Devices and Services. When you write things like Microsoft acquired Nokia, bought Nokia, merged with Nokia or you reference Nokia being a part of Microsoft, Nokia being owned by Microsoft, you sir, are not correct as Nokia is a separate company. There is a factual difference and for the most part, in your writings where you reference the D&S deal, you writing does not state the truth. Proof reading does not automatically mean something is true. Many readers agree and whole heartidly believe you when you say Microsoft bought Nokia and that is simply not true and I am not referring to the one article either. I will write more but for now, I am off to lunch.    
  • +1.  Preach, Deaconclgi.  It may be best to just not click on his articles (I know I certainly make an effort to limit clicks on his 'articles').    
  • :-( awh.
  • When the majority of people think Nokia, they think of the mobile division which is what has been aquired by Microsoft.      So there's an intellectual property section, the Here maps division, and the network association with Siemens, but the consumer facing part has gone to Microsoft. What the f*ck is Nokia ITSELF??    A significant portion, and in fact the most significant portion for consumers, has been aquired/merged with Microsoft. Don't be petty....
  • Don't rise to the bait! They have you now. :-(
  • b23h, it is great that you know the details of the MS and Nokia D&S deal but let's face reality, not everyone knows what you know and what you think is the most significant portion of Nokia is just your/our opinions. It isn't petty when a writer reports his own opinion as fact. What is Nokia? Nokia is a company and if the company has not been acquired, we, as writers should not say they have been acquired, regardless of our own opinions, feelings, thoughts and understanding of the matter. Rich isn't just writing to the readers that KNOW what the deal is, he is writing to everyone and that includes people that don't know and they will leave his articles with the impression that Microsoft acquired Nokia, which is not true at all...factually. I am a writer so I write a lot of words, that does not mean that I am angry. I'm not mad at anyone, I am just serious about the integrity of this site and the information that is passed on to readers.
  • It is fact and not opinion that the primary consumer facing portion of Nokia is the devices division, and that has been aquired by Microsoft.   For millions of people when you say Nokia, they think cell phones and that is now Microsoft.   That is just fact.... I don't have any issues with the article as written before or now....
  • It is not a fact that Nokia has merged with Microsoft and it is not a fact that Microsoft has acquired Nokia. None of that has happened and those are opinions. It doesn't matter what millions of people think, what matters is what legally happened and legally, factually, Microsoft has not purchased, acquired, bought or merged with Nokia. I am not disputing what people think of Nokia as what they think is their opinion. I am disputing misleading or incorrect information that is written as fact. The corrected words in the article are in factually correct now. The acquisition was for Nokia's Devices and Services division and not Nokia, regardless of what you, I or Rich, or the millions of Hulkamaniacs think. I am glad he corrected the article as it now an accurate representation of what happened. It is funny that the corrected, factual text links to the article with the false, incorrect title. The correct text and the title of that linked article do not mean the same thing. The corrected text is accurate: a division of Nokia. The linked title is not accurate: The company Nokia. The two are not the same.
  • Ok Sheldon, whatever you say...  
  • Good for you, Slovosky.
  • That would be true but Nokia was not acquired by Microsoft and Nokia did not merge with Microsoft. Nokia's Devices and Services division was sold via a cash transaction to Microsoft and Nokia remains a separate and independant company. Definition of 'Merger' The combining of two or more companies, generally by offering the stockholders of one company securities in the acquiring company in exchange for the surrender of their stock.   Investopedia explains 'Merger'
      Basically, when two companies become one. This decision is usually mutual between both firms.   The thing that Rich keeps on insisting and writing is that two COMPANIES (Microsoft and Nokia) became one and that is not true. Microsoft and Nokia are two separate companies. Microsoft has not, as of today, announced that they are buying Nokia, have bought Nokia, have merged with Nokia or are going to merge with Nokia.
  • Read this: theverge .com/2013/9/2/4688530/microsoft-buys-nokias-devices-and-services-unit-unites-windows-phone   Seriously bro, Microsoft bought Nokia. Accept the fact, and cite sources to defend your statements saying that 'Microsoft has not, as of today, announced that they are buying Nokia, have bought Nokia, have merged with Nokia or are going to merge with Nokia.'.  If you are to present facts, be sure to give sources on where you get that statement, because you clearly didn't gave sources except the defenition of merger.    
  • Rex Endozo, you should read what you posted. Buying Nokia's Devices and Services division does not equal buying Nokia. ALL of the official press releases clearly state that Microsoft has bought Nokia's Devices and Services division and NONE state that Microsoft has bought Nokia. That verge article has inaccurate statements as well, "And from Huawei to HTC, there are still other partners — Nokia's coming in-house, but Windows Phone 8 isn't being walled off" Nokia is NOT coming in house, employees that used to work foe Nokia are coming in-house to Microsoft. Nokia, a company, is not going anywhere. Nokia is not a part of Microsoft. Microsoft purchased a division from Nokia which included employees and licensing agreements. Your so called facts are wrong and the victim or inaccurate statements by certain writers. Here are the facts: Here is Nokia's website: This is simple. Nokia is a separate company and has not been bought by Microsoft. Nokia is a company. Microsoft didnt buy a company. Devices and Services was a division within the company called Nokia. Nokia sold that business to Microsoft. Nokia is still a company that is not owned or was bought by Microsoft. Rex, if you have a company, Rex's Produce, and you sell Oranges and Apples, and I buy the Apples business from you, I didnt just buy Rex's Produce, I bought the Apples division. I don't own your company, my company didnt merge with your company. Rex's Produce is still a separate company, not owned by me. Microsoft did not buy Nokia, they bought Nokia's Devices and Services division. Nokia is a company. D&S was a division inside Nokia. Nokia is still a company, not owned by Microsoft, that no longer has a Devices and Services division at this time. Buying Nokia's Devices and Services division and buying Nokia is not the same thing. Rich, this is the end result of writing inaccurate articles about the MS and Nokia Devices and Services deal. You are not the only writer to have said that Microsoft has bought Nokia and I wish that you would engage your readers more or at least correct your previous articles. Rex Endozo actually believes that Microsoft bought Nokia. The simple question: Does Microsoft own Nokia? The answer is No. Come on people, at least read what the actual press releases factually say....for your own sake.
  • lol.
  • But seriously, you are wrong. Check out the definitions of the words. As a writer, you should welcome the feedback.
  • + all the numbers in the world and you win the internet in my opinion! I agree completely with every word that you wrote in that comment.
  • So do I! So let me know when the "feedback" starts. :-)
  • Multiple readers have been giving you feedback concerning the accuracy of your articles that refrence the sale of Nokia's Devices and Services division that you have written and it hasn't just myself and DJCBS. :-)
  • Double-LOL
  • Relax man. No need to embark on crusade to defend Nokia's holiness, it's all business.
  • Did that long thread really just happen!? In all seriousness though, I bought Nokia, cash.
  • Love this... What a great idea to help with merger/integration.
  • Can I buy this somehow
  • Exactly, I would really love to buy it.
  • Checked eBay, no go
  • Can I download it somewhere as pdf?
  • Where can I get it?
  • Can I buy it....
  • Can we buy one?
  • Microsoft sometimes reminds me of Casper, the friendly ghost. :) Or a good granny which won't let you leave until you sit down and have a plateful of best beef stew. :)
  • Some fairly weird analogies, but OK.
  • Casper, the dead baby, or if you go with the movie, the dead child. Never really found that character appealing, nor the notion that a child would be terrorized by other ghosts in the afterlife. Casper must have been one evil little monster brat kid. Not much like Microsoft at all...more like Google, I hope.
  • how you defined Casper :)
  • Nice. I'm sure a few of these will appear on eBay before long.
  • A bible of sorts then, I guess?
  • I want one
  • I can't wait for these things to pop up in eBay and then, cha-ching!
  • A 'Buy now' link necessary :-D .
  • What we got to remember
  • I want one too. I'll even temporarily become a Nokian just to get my handbook and than resign.
  • I want one TOO
  • Very nice gesture by MS.
  • The vision is surely retrofitted. I seriously doubt MS had it back there in their early beginnings.
  • I through mine a way. I quit!!!
  • Cool!
  • So they can market this but not WP or Surface? Even without the book people will come and work at Microsoft, pay is enough. Spend such money to show how awesome WP or surface is to the masses.