Skip to main content

Nokia beginning to take potential Surface Phone from Microsoft seriously?

Nokia has begun to take a potential Surface Phone from Microsoft rather seriously, according to risks detailed in a SEC filing. The company has bet everything on Windows Phone and many would naturally assume that Stephen Elop and co. made the leap to Microsoft's mobile platform with enough security in-mind. So what's going on to make the company reveal some new threats that weren't noted previously?

Back in its 2011 20F filing, Nokia stated the main threat was that it may not be able to turn a profit by moving from royalty-free Symbian to the royalty-laden Windows Phone. There's a slight change in its 2012 20F filing, which was released on Thursday. Nokia now acknowledges a new risk from the move to Windows Phone: that Microsoft cuts investment in the mobile platform, or completely pulls the plug altogether. 

"Microsoft may act independently of us with respect to decisions and communications on that operating system which may have a negative effect on us. Moreover, if Microsoft reduces investment in that operating system or discontinues it, our smartphone strategy would be directly negatively affected by such acts."

As well as the above threats of Microsoft ditching Windows Phone, which seems like a highly unlikely outcome for the moment with the mobile platform fitting in nicely with the company's "three screens" vision, Nokia also touched on the speculation and rumour that Microsoft is broadening its product catalogue by looking into a Microsoft branded Windows Phone Phone. This comes after Elop seemingly welcomed such a smartphone to be released.

"Microsoft may make strategic decisions or changes that may be detrimental to us. For example, in addition to the Surface tablet, Microsoft may broaden its strategy to sell other mobile devices under its own brand, including smartphones. This could lead Microsoft to focus more on their own devices and less on mobile devices of other manufacturers that operate on the Windows Phone platform, including Nokia."

For the time being, Nokia remains the dominant partner for Windows Phone, but in some instances its Lumia brand is becoming recognised more than the platform itself. Microsoft may want to tackle a potential problem with the Windows Phone branding being drowned out. We previously looked at social media activity through Mobile World Congress, which illustrated just how popular Nokia and Lumia were, with Windows Phone and Microsoft way down in the popularity table (but the company wasn't in force at the event).

While Nokia (and HTC) are major partners for Microsoft in the mobile industry, Windows OEM partners have also played a part in further developing the ecosystem, but that failed to prevent Microsoft from launching its own hardware - the two Surface Windows tablets. Of course, the likes of Acer, Dell, HP and Asus cannot be directly compared to Nokia, but it's an interesting trail of thought to engage with. 

It's not farfetched to believe that Microsoft is considering a "Plan B", or starting to look at what a Surface Phone would look like as a prototype. If (and that's a fairly big "if") Microsoft does hop into the hardware game with Windows Phone, we'd stand by the notion that the company would likely sell the handsets through its online and physical stores.

Source: SEC, via: ZDNET; thanks to everyone who tipped us!

Rich Edmonds
Senior Editor, PC Build

Rich Edmonds is 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 over on Twitter at @RichEdmonds.

206 Comments
  • But wouldn't Nokia's Lumia brand be the main brand for WP devices? To me, a Surface phone would have to target a niche, or else you're battling with Nokia exclusives etc, helping make Nokia a winner still in the devices? Still, it's an interesting though, just getting read to hear the cries of "I told you so!"
  • I agree with you. With how "successful" the surface rt & pro are doing (note sarcasm), I really don't see a surface phone becoming a reality, unless as a backup plan. I could be wrong, knowing Microsoft, but would hope they wait another year and gain more market share before dropping a surface phone on us. I just don't see the same need for them to push WP OEM's, like they needed to with their PC partners. I think we all know Nokia is far ahead of Microsoft in that regard.
  • It is sort of like a nexus phone to the galaxy s3. This shouldn't really hurt Nokia, unless Microsoft does something amazing.
  • This! Agree with unstoppablekem. Surface Phone would be like Nexus. Nokia would still have a major place in the market like Samsung does with Android.
  • Not really the same imho! Android is an open system which can be heavily modified by manufacturers like Samsung and HTC to differentiate themselves from eachother and pure vanilla Android.
    WP doesn't over such levels of customization so with a Surface phone, other parties like Nokia and HTC would have a hard time to make a difference.
  • Isn't that role fulfilled by HTC's phones? Considering they called those phones the "Windows Phone 8X" and "Windows Phone 8S"
    Granted, I wouldn't mind a Surface phone. The mockups look pretty sweet. =)
  • microsoft can't even get their wp software right so the hardware's a distant possibility. the nexus phone gained popularity only after google got their android in JB at a usable level
  • Huh?
  • I agree with his contention; Microsoft shouldn't be considering WP hardware in the slightest when it has heaps of work to do on software. It was rather painful to see the beating around the bush in the last podcast (regarding... podcasts), Jay was completely right that there was no reason that Microsoft couldn't have assigned some intern a one-day task of adding podcast subscriptions by feed URL.
  • I also agree with your agreeing. :)
     
    WP8 is nice but the basic apps really need to be fixed. The mail client is boring and uninspired, the calendar app is way lame (good thing for Chronos- if you dont have it, GET IT!), and SkyDrive ain't all that. Then there's the issue with recording to SD cards (though I believe I have found a solution for that). I also am seeing issues having music correctly synced.
     
    Nokia is really the ONLY manufacturer who's really pushing this platform. The hardware is great, the model lineup is varied, and they are really getting quality apps out there. For MS to get into the market making their own hardware (phones, that is), would just be plain stupid. I know why MS did it in the mobile ecosystem, but Nokia is really hitting the ball well with their Lumina lineup.
     
    MS needs to concentrate on getting the missing functionality back into the OS and updating Surface Pro later this year.
     
  • I didn't even know the nexus ever really got popular. I don't know if I've ever even seen one in real life.
  • there is plenty media buzz around nexus 4
  • Is that the one where the guy breaks out of a seemingly cement looking container?
  • i dunno about ads i was talkin about tech blogs n sites
  • in android land...there is more buzz with Samsung Galaxy products than the Nexas products (including the nexus 4). I'm so tired of hearing about Galaxy S this Galaxy S that... Anyway, there are talks/rumors that Google is trying to find a way to keep the Samsung line in check as other OEMs ... including Google, have been hammered by Samsung.
  • A couple of coworkers at work have nexus devices. I thought that they were quite nice when I saw them.
  • Galaxy Nexus sold well, but in a niche market
  • Right, because the same people who work on the software will work on the hardware.... /sarcasm. If they do develop hardware it will have nothing to do with the software side, other than run it. Not like it'll prohibit software development. So I dont see what's the problem with then making their own phone. That being said I'd still probably buy a Lumia device over a Surface phone.
  • I owned a Nexus One. It wasn't a high sale phone, because Google treated it's release more as a test, i.e. selling it themselves online exclusively. Although, I believe it was available in T-Mobile stores too. I myself had the AT&T version, so online was the only way to acquire that version. Motorola on the other hand was advertising the dickens out of Droid. For a phone designed primarily for developers and with a limited channel for purchasing, the Nexus One did pretty well. And it gave Google the groundwork for what would eventually be Play and selling the Galaxy and 4 Nexus'. Oh, and I loved Froyo, so I disagree about JB being the first usable level.
  • with Lumia line around, don't see the need for reference device.
  • ^This.  The Lumia is the reference device - just ask HTC :)
  • And Huawei.
  • Surface is a BUSINESS. Balmer has said this numerous times.
  • Meh. If Microsoft released a phone it would be available in US only, and what's worse: locked to one carrier, so people wouldn't be able to easily export it like they did with the Surface.
    MS Phone would be the next Kin - a hupe flop and no threat to Nokia or anyone.
  • Yes, but nokia fails to deliver Products at time....
    Talking about Nokia 520, 720 ? where are thos devices now ? Nowhere?
  • did they said coming imediately to global market? Read and think, not open your mouth and shit.
  • Microsoft can deliver quicker and Prices will (could) be lower
  • Quicker than what? Apple and Samsung will have managed to release two new series of tablets and phones before Surface Pro surfaces in Europe.
  • What the fudge are you blabbing about? The release schedule for those devices hasn't been revealed yet.
  • Not released , but prasented ? Wright ?...so we have to wait 3 months again ?...And wait again because stokes will be out after that?
  • And the Surface was revealed in June 2012, and released in October 2012.  Do you really think that a Surface phone would come to market immediately after it's released given Microsoft's track record with the Surface?
  • Different story with different parameter ....And one of this parameter was windows 8 availability...
  • The Surface Pro was just released last month, revealed in 2012, and Windows 8 has been out since October 2012.....
  • And Windows 8 Consumer Preview was available Feburary 2012... And Windows 8 Developer Preview was available September 2011...
  • I'm sure MS have learned a lesson with the Zune US only sales. I'm planning on get an MS phone if they release one
  • No, they didn't learn a thing. They keep repeating the same mistakes with Surface RT and Surface Pro.
  • you guys don't study business i guess....actually i'm sure.
    Nokia has to outline every possible risk. They MUST mention anything they can think of in order to not get sued by investors. Is Nokia afraid? maybe, maybe not. But that doesn't mean OTHERS cannot be afraid and since they have to mention any potential condition that could impact the stock price, they have to put it in there.
     
    But as usual the blogosphere has nothing to report...so they make a story.
  • Completely agree. There is no story here.
  • Right, which is why it wasn't listed in the previous filing. It's not rocket science ... or "business science" as you put it, but more an observation that Nokia has at least mentioned a potential threat from Microsoft. That's the story. 
  • And what made them see the threat they haven't seen earlier? My guess it was the release of Surface, that prooved Microsoft is crazy and rich enough to secretly develop and release innovative hardware. But we all know they still aren't a real threat for other OEMs.
  • Did the OEM not just release decent convertibles after the surface? 
  • No, Microsoft didn't deliver anything after the Surface. They didn't even manage to release the Surface Pro for real.
  • In November, Wall Street Journal reported that MS was testing phone with asian suppliers. Whether report is true or not, Nokia has to put possiblity in report.
  • Agreed.
  • Rich usually gets it right but the problem with most tech bloggers is they know a lot about technology but have very little idea about reporting/journalism. Most techies also lack management/business concepts and fail despite having brilliant products/innovations. SWOT analysis is a vital component of company management report, where T outlines all the potential long term threats. As SWOT encompasses every possible opportunities and threats for the long term, they are often exxagerted.
  • Totally agree. Furthermore, its a realistic scenario. Take a look at Ceton and all the BS they are going through. Microsoft drops stuff slightly before it's finally almost the perfect thing. Its like they're willing to put up with loss for slightly less than they should.
  • Exactly!  In the information security world...SEC filings are similar to incident response, business continuity, disaster recovery plans for an organization. Simply... risk managment Every business does it.  These filings have been sweeping the media world the last couple of days...Some media outlets are spinning this as "negative" towards WP because they just do not understand the business side of things. 
  • I'd rather they focus their efforts on improving the OS first. Though I guess you can never have enough options where hardware is concerned
  • It wouldnt be the same Team
  • I realize the software folks won't be building the phone. I meant in general terms, MS needs to focus on improving the OS
  • I dont see anything wrong with the os...
  • No offense - but you must be blind or really .. really easy to please
  • My thoughts exactly!
  • of course. but t am not blind and i am not easy to please...The true is , wp8 est just perfekt now.
  • False. I love WP but saying that it's perfect as-is is just untrue.
  • Then , tell us  why windows phone 8 should not be perfekt now ?
  • Just a few points that I can think of off the top of my head: lack of notification center; live tiles that sometimes don't work properly; lack of separate volume controls for ringer/music/games/etc; lack of some key apps and games; not being able to separate music on the memory from music in the cloud, and assorted other music app problems including the lame and lifeless "live" tile; and the list goes on and on. There's plenty I haven't mentioned, including anything regarding business stuff I know nothing about. I LOVE my Lumia 920 (best phone I've owned since my Pre), but to pretend that wp8 is perfect is to say that NOTHING about it can be improved, which is delusional.
  • Please provide a description of what you feel the OS is lacking instead of insulting him. It seems like your just trolling.
  • I agree. Google has a huge team dedicated to Android. They are constantly improving and updating it with new features - I'd like Microsoft to do the same (because they'd do it right). It isn't that the OS is "lacking", it's just that they need to improve constantly if they really want to make an impact.
  • I don't care what people think or say about Microsoft & OS, I love my ATIV S smartphone compared to other's! I would take my ATIV S any day over Android Galaxy S3 & Apple iPhone 5, BB Z10 all not equal to WP8 in my eyes! I supported Windows Mobile/Phone for a long time, WM5.0, WM6.0, WM6.1, WM6.5, WP8.
  • I believe that Nokia and HTC Will remain the primary carriers of WP software. If Microsoft started making their own phones, why cut it's own revenue and ditch the other manufacturers?
  • It needs to be understood that these SEC filings don't express legitimate, major concerns. For example, Microsoft abandoning Windows Phone is highly unlikely without some other mobile software strategy. Nokia's management simply needs to disclose all possible predictable risk factors to fend off potential legal liability toward shareholders. I believe Nokia was sued by one investor for misrepresenting the volume of Lumia sales just recently. 
  • Hmmm I wish that they would just buy Nokia already that way this would be a win/win/win... A win for MSFT, a win for Nokia, and a win for me...
  • disagree!
    Nokia has a class of its own. the way it works, and cares for its customers; Microsoft can never get that close to awesomeness.
    i don't hate Microsoft, but i dearly love Nokia and would love to see it rise back to the throne.
  • I mean, they purchase Nokia the same way they purchased Skype... Skype still has "most" of their employees intact. They use Skype badges around the grounds not MSFT ones... They are a company inside of a much bigger ones... So Skype is responsible for Skype,etc so Nokia can still function the way they function-creatively- but under MSFT name... Win|Win Windows!!!!!
  • i would still like to see Nokia do stuff independently, with it's own name, and then also look towards platforms other than windows phone. maybe develop something on its own too.
    it's just that they went through a bad phase, and are trying to bounce back now. i pray they do that.
    if MS takes over, it'll purely be a Windows Phone.
    and honestly, i love owning a Nokia Lumia, rather than just having a Windows Phone.
    and as i said before, i want Nokia to be known for more than just windows phone.
    they had their own ideas like human form, or the carbene phone and others. it's unlikely for them to happen if MS takes over.
    and if MS buys Nokia, and Nokia still is the same, in terms of everything they do, what's the point? it's just that MS makes more money there and probably gets more publicity.
    better than that let them be seperate, so the world can see progression and innovation in two different directions (basically a wider progress) instead of both of them merged into a unidirectional one.
  • Microsoft would RUIN Nokia. May God never allow such purchase to happen.
  • Everything Microsoft touches turns to Gold: dos, windows, Xbox, office, etc. Well almost kin is the exception. So Microsoft buying Nokia would not Ruin them it would show how serious Microsoft is to make WP work.
  • Oh yes, and Microsoft Bob, Windows ME, Windows Vista, Zune - pure gold!
  • +1
  • Billions of dollars were made by companies that used and continue to use Microsoft products. So yea...pure gold. FYI you may not have heard of these products but they are the backbone of fortune 500 Co. Exchange, SQL, CRM, SharePoint, server NT - 2012
  • Yes, I am aware of the succesful products. As well as the unseccessful ones. Hence I know it's just silly to say "everything MS touches turns to Gold". Especially seeing how "well" WP is doing.
  • WP would be doing a lot better if Nokia would have had the 920 on all carriers. As a consultant I've seen a large number of clients pass as they aren't willing to move to ATT but want the 920.
  • @Tomasz Didn't Microsoft help save Apple? Isn't Nokia doing well now? Also Vista sold quite well.
  • Yes to protect the company from being divided up by the government.
  • Nokia was doing well (rising profits) before deal with MS (decline and billions/marketshare lost).
    2012Q4 Nokia's profit has nothing to do with WP.
  • Wait... I had originally thought that it was the opposite before the deal.  Why would Nokia kill off Symbian then if it was doing fantastic in the market?  Plus, Nokia used to be the king of phones sales.  Where were they at before the deal?  Not at the top anymore....  
  • Symbian marketshare was declining, but profit was rising (2010Q4 was the most profitable quarter in 2010 for Nokia), but after 2011Q1 (Nokia - MS deal and Elop's "burning platfrom" memo), Nokia's smartphone marketshare/profits simply crashed. 
    Nokia was still No.1 smartphone maker in the world (by a long shot) before and some time after Nokia-MS deal.
    Nokia had a strategy for a gradual Symbian replacement and migrating to Meego (N9)/Meltemi. Symbian/Meego/Meltemi should all have been based on QT (shared applications between these platfroms). Everything was almost ready (years of work and billions of euros).
    Then Elop introduced WP strategy (he wasn't hired for that in first place. His job was to implement original strategy from Nokia).
    Symbian was declared dead by Elop ("burning platform" memo) in 2011Q1, then soon after that the same happend to N9 (declared dead by Nokia's CEO even before its limited launch). Finally, half a year ago Meltemi was killed too. All original Nokia OS's were wiped out and Nokia left with only WP. The OS which didn't sell. The OS which even 2 years after the deal still has almost the same functionality as before.
    WP7 couldn't replace Meego as Symbian's successor (very limited functionality, very different UI and created by Microsoft (Nokia was a strong supporter of open source (Symbian, Linux (Maemo,Meego,Meltemi), QT) for many years. For many people N9's OS was and still is a superior OS to WP (UI, functionality). Proof of that is that most of Symbian users went for Android. 
    Hope it is clear enough (even if not perfect).
     
     
     
  • Stop trolling. Symbian sucked, only nerds liked it, and the N9 never had a chance against iOS and android.
    Nokia was still #1 in 2010 becasue feature phones were still selling well worlwide, not thanks to Symbian.
     
  • http://www.computerweekly.com/news/1280095000/Google-Android-overtakes-N...
    As you can see, Nokia is No.1 smartphone vendor in 2010Q4. Smartphone shipments grew up by 30% (2009Q4 - 2010Q4)
    P.s. Nokia smartphone means a phone running Symbian. 
  • The data you provided clearly says, that Nokia's smartphone marketshare dropped from 45% to 30% in a year (2009Q4 - 2010Q4), while Google grew from 10 to 30. And as you can clearly see in this handy infographic: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/World_Wide_Smartphone_Sales_Share.png
    Symbian had been rolling downhill since the iPhone came around, and the platform caught fire once android ensued, long before Elop took the steering wheel, when it was already too late to avoid the iceberg.
     
  • Yes, and I clearly said that Symbian marketshare was declining (still Symbian had 10X marketshare of WP today and Symbian still has an infinitely larger active user base than WP today), but sales were growing, profit was growing and Symbian refresh was on the way. As well as Meego (N9) and later Meltemi. All this with underlying QT base (easy for developers to reach huge Symbian user base (No.1 at that time and still No.3 today) and Meego/Meltemi. Oh, and Symbian had 100k applications in its store long before WP.
     
    If this situation was so bad, maybe we should advice Apple to ditch iOS for WP, because today Apple smartphone marketshare is shrinking (less than Symbian in 2010Q4), despite growing unit sales and profitability. 
     
    And now lets return to Nokia WP strategy: small marketshare growth (around 2.5% worldwide at best in 2012Q4) and heavy money loss in 2012 (Symbian was always profitable). 
     
    If Symbian situation was so bad when it had 30% of worldwide smartphone marketshare in sales (2010Q4, 31mln units) and was No.1 in active users, had 30% sales growth (and that is a lot more than 200/300% growth for non-existant WP sales) and rising profits, how would you call WP strategy for Nokia today? Total disaster? 
  • Symbian sales were heading down regardless of Elop. In 2010 Nokia still had enough money to jump ship onto android or WP. In 2012 it would be too late.
    It's better to have 2,5% and rising, than 2,5% and falling marketshare, isin't it?
     
  • NT 4.0, NT 5.0, NT 6.0 were all garbage! The only good NT was NT 5.1 (XP) & NT 6.1 (Windows 7) sales wise! My personal favorite NT is NT 5.2 (XP professional 64-bit) & NT 6.2 (Windows 8) but this is my opinion.
  • If Microsoft does make it they need to follow the same steps as the Nexus phones and the iPhones. Deliver updates independently of carriers (except if you're Verizon of course)
  • If you make Pizza. You make the Pizza the customer wants. If you make Smartphones. You do the same thing. Nokia should also make Android phones, to make money and to know where Android is. Also, Nokia amd HTC should consider merging their smartphone business. HTC should do all high end devices and manufacture those in Taiwan. This for HTC and Nokia. Nokia should do all volume products. Look, you can't charge the same for a VW then for a BMW. Nokia brand is dead in all high price markets. Nokia stands for cheap stuff, it is also what they're making. HTC has shown again and again that they can compete in the high end market. Their problem comes from design. I have a OneX+... Is as beautiful as a Glock... (in the sense that it is all about function not beauty) Nokia has also good designers. A combined Nokia&HTC would be a mighty company, more capable at serving the low end and high end markets where the money is. Marketing wise "HTC-Nokia" would be mighty. Seems to me that Elop and Chou, should give the idea of making money a thought... Too many socialist... LOL
  • This about Windows Phone....You are in a windows phone site. we are talking about Nokia and not if Nokia should chose Android. The choice is done and Nokia is all about  Windows Phone...
  • Not really. Nokia can go the Android way whenever they please.
  • You realize they most probably have exclusivity deal with Microsoft? On top of that current Lumia line is perfect match for WP. Not so much for Android.
  • I'm just as confused as you are...
  • What are you smoking?
  • I wouldn't be referring to HTC as high end anything. I've had numerous HTC devices and have always said I'd never buy another, but they always suck me back in with new product launches. After a month or so I always regret my purchase. There's always something with HTC devices that just doesn't work correctly. With Nokia and the Lumia, I just can't seem to find anything I like better.
  • "Nokia stands for cheap stuff"...I'm not looking to start a fight, but my Lumia 920 and 900 before that beg to differ. I tend to regard Nokia as high class, not low. (USA here.)
  • There are too many stupid points here to even waste time debating. Just allow me to highlight them:
    -The Pizza analogy.
    -Nokia doing Android.
    -Nokia/HTC merger (wtf, lol)
    -"Nokia stands for cheap stuff" (someone please drop a Lumia 920 on his head) . . .
    -Nokia brand is "dead" in high price markets. This sounds like speculation on the level of the National Enquirer.
    I too am confused Rich Edmonds.
  • I completely agree with you. I own 2 L920 and before that I had titan 1 and 2 which were sent in for repair twice each. I have had zero issues with my 920. This guys is nuts if he thinks otherwise.
  • Equating smartphones to pizza is poorly thought out.  If you are coming from android it makes sense - you take the base OS then add a bunch of crap ontop of it and hope your new ingredients differentiate between the other OEM's - and thats just it HOPE. You still end up with crap and hope to make up for it by selling higher volume.
    Samsung dominates android, Nokia could make some of the best devices but would be drowned out by Samsung's marketing - Samsung spent more than apple and microsoft and many other tech companies last year on marketing costs alone.  With enough marketing you can sell just about anything.  Samsung has the manufacturing capability down so well they can produce devices at incredibly low price.  The've recently come out saying they dont intend to use metals and want to keep prices for their products down for them, while keeping prices for consumers the same.  That does not equate to high end.
    Nokia on the other hand is building a base with Windows Phone and has done quite well for itself - it is now commanding 75% marketshare with little competition.  As the WP user base grows more and more will move to Nokia, all the other OEM's are too busy focused on android or dabling in firefox or ubuntu phone because they can't make enough off Android.  HTC will go bankrupt, it wasnt focused and spent far too many resources putting out the next 'pizza' every other month to try to grab headlines because their phones could not get the consumer attention - thats what happens when you go to the android camp - everyone wants low cost phones, and so the only way to do that is provide low cost and cheap materials with poor construction if you want to remain profitable.  Android is a race to the bottom.
    Nokia is paying for exclusives for Windows Phone, bringng new apps and games to market, they are also developing their camera technology for Windows Phone and building dozens of apps exclusviely for Windows Phone.  If they had to do the same thing for Android at the same time then they would have multiple projects going on and not focusing on a single ecosystem where they can excel at.  Nokia rightly decided to focus all their resources on the smartphone division to Windows Phone - they get platform support (around $250 million every quarter from Microsoft) and get direct say in what happens to the base OS, maps on WP is now running off Nokia's navteq data
    Nokia stands for cheap?  You use and advocate android which is advertisment laden spyware and the majority of phones in the android camp are rehashed over and over and cheaply made with the only 'plus' they have is higher specs.  Android requires higher specs because its bloated.  Those higher specs lead to more battery drain and why android phones dont last very long on a daily usage.  Nokia has also had quality hardware that is resilient to breaking and are known for durable phones.  Nokia always had a software problem because their previous OS (symbian) was not touch based and behind the times.  It simply wasnt able to change fast enough for the emerging touch market.
    You can keep making pizza at $5 and cater to the high volume low price customer, thats not what Nokia is looking to do. Watch all these android oem's go under - HTC will be the first, because the race to the bottom - go as cheap as possible to try to get consumers to notice your goods only means lower profits and reputation being tarnished.  Android is a temporary OS in the smartphone race and within 5 years will be dead.
  • +10000000000000000000000000000000
  • Microsoft needs to fix its half assed operating systems PC and mobile because doing hardware. Bother win8 and wp8 should never have been released this early
  • What is wrong with w8 and wp8 ?
  • +1
  • What's so bad about Win8? I can understand there are a few things with WP8 that could use improvement, but Win8 is fine...
  • Windows 8 needs a little work for desktop users. The ability to disable metro and enable the start menu would allow regular keyboard and mouse people to be happy with win8. Tablets, all in one computers and the surface pro are perfect for the metro interface If that's what the user wants. But it needs that option without the need for hacking or installing 3rd party software. Win 8 is very stable and usable tho.
  • keyboard and mouse people never heard of clicking on that big START button on the keyboard?  Or would they rather travel the mouse alllllll the way to the bottom left corner to click on the start menu where they have an unorganized mess of 3000 shorcuts to programs? 
    MS changed how the start menu works - its now a full screen and you can easily choose what shortcuts you want on it.
    You are not required to used modern UI apps, click the desktop tile on the start screen and yuo can forever work on the desktop without going back to modern ui until the next time you reboot.
    This is the same argument over and over by the same people that have not used Windows 8 for more than 10 minutes and are simply stuck in an old way of doing things because they feel its the 'right way'.  The right way was done wrong for 10+ years so you think its right, when an improvment is made many of these people feel it shoudlnt be fixed.
    MS won't backtrack, you wont see a start menu in Windows ever again.
  • +1 I love Windows 8 and when I used my Windows 7 I started looking for the metro. I guess some people can't adopt or fighting to adopt.
  • I need to take some time to upgrade my desktop as W7 feels outdated after using my laptop W8 & WP8. I agree anyone that doesn't get W8 hasn't spent time. Its like only having a Motorcycle from the age of 16 to 28 then trying a car. It takes time to adjust. On a side note man I miss my bike but love my AMG way more. I also miss WM 6.1 but love my WP8
  • What I don't understand is, why do people consider "fixing software first" to the question of whether Microsoft should ditch OEMs? What's the problem with MSFT doing both? Do you ppl really think that MSFT doesn't have the resources & manpower to do such a thing? Its not like OEMs are crazy about WP8 anyway so the hell with em. Like Ballmer always says, "its business". MSFT tried, the OEMs don't appear to care, all sitting on the sidelines for whatever reasons; THE HELL WITH EM. MSFT gas GDR 2, GDR 3 & Windows/Windows Phone Blue coming to fix the software side of things. No OS is perfect, they're making strides for improving the OS's, be patient it'll come. Also, looking at past mistakes of MSFT & equivocating them with todays decisions are both unrealistic & unconstructive.
  • The way Microsoft is handling windows phone, Nokia should also keep a Plan B: that is 2-3 android handsets along with windows phone lineup as android will easily run on the Qualcomm chips as there is no SOC restrictions on android side.
  • No androids here !!!
  • Why not? If MS can backstab Nokia by releasing a surface phone instead of improving the OS, adding basic features, xbox live improvements and bringing MS apps and game IP then why should Nokia be windows phone exclusive, even Nokia should make few android handsets to check the demand.
  • Because Nokia IS microsoft exclusive !!! Take it like that. You cannot change that .
  • Only for now, it can be changed and Nokia CAN and SHOULD try Android if MS backstabs them by releasing surface phone instead of working on OS.
  • Fandroid dreamers on a WP site!  Please stop that noise.
     
    If Nokia wanted to go Android, they would have when they spoke with Google back in 2010; they chose WP - Deal With It!
  • I am not a fandroid but will easily become one as soon as Nokia releases a android handset, Also Android has captured 70% Global marketshare- Deal with It!
  • Some other software that had over 70% of the market at one time: WordPerfect
    Lotus 1-2-3
    Novell NetWare
    Netscape Navigator I wonder what happened with those.
  • They are irrelevant, just like Kin and Zune, even Windows phone may join that list if Microsoft doesnt improve the OS and the apps and games situation.
  • They are irrelevant because Microsoft made them irrelevant.
    WordPerfect - replaced by MS Word
    Lotus 1-2-3 - replaced by MS Excel
    Novell NetWare - replaced by MS's server and network offerings
    Netscape - replaced by Internet Explorer and I have several friends who are massive apple fans but still to this day use Zune HD's. the Zune's problem wasn't the hardware, its the horrible marketing done for it by MS.  
  • It doesnt matter what was the reason , zune and kin are irrelevant, and even Windoes phone will join that list if MS doesnt work hard on imporving the OS and ecosystem.
  • McDonalds has a high marketshare for selling hamburgers too, that still doesn't mean the burgers aren't pure shit. Android is no different, its pure shit.
  • Hmmm, Similar to Windows marketshare in Desktop i guess, thats the same analogy used by mac fans, Windows desktop marketshare= McDonalds burgers.