The Rise and Fall of Nokia

Avatar
8

For Interest BBC4 at 9 pm (UK Time)

Notwithstanding the predictable lazy narrative suggesting that Nokia are now in a poor business position. Hey Ho

Comments (8)

8 responses to “The Rise and Fall of Nokia”

  1. Avatar

    Tony Barrett

    Maybe you should re-title that 'the rise and fall and rise of Nokia'. Nokia were once the biggest phone company in the world. The didn't see the iPhone coming, so started a fall, then MS bought them out and the fall became a crash'n'burn, now with HMG Global, they're on the rise again, as far away from Microsoft as possible, and with some very good Android handsets.

    • Avatar

      Paul Thurrott

      In reply to ghostrider:

      HMD's phone business is nothing to the scale of the old Nokia. They are able to make a go at this specifically because the old Nokia failed and took down its entire infrastructure (factories, workers with healthcare benefits and pensions, etc.) with it. The old Nokia crashed and burned long before Windows phone or the Microsoft acquisition. It was a downward spiral starting with the iPhone.

    • Avatar

      F4IL

      In reply to ghostrider:

      Agreed. Adopting windows as their mobile platform turned their decline to free fall.

      Many will support the Nokia was dying before msft bought them narrative, but anyone can recognize the fallacy that killing is different than potentially letting die.


      Another interesting aspect in msft's inflexible and mono-cultural approach to the acquisition is that, while competitors (like apple and google) acquired companies with the goal of successfully integrating their operating systems (NeXT, Android Inc, etc), msft acquired Nokia and immediately and completely extinguished everything they had in order to clear the path for windows.


      I believe the above is really insightful, especially in the case of windows. In a company where windows was supposed to be a cohesive project (one metro, modern, universal UI - UX, etc), it really was a fragmented mess, run by different teams, siloed in their little echo chambers, completely hostile to any kind of external influence.


      This really goes a long way to show their inability to turn an acquisition into a productive and meaningful collaboration that goes both ways. They literally bought Nokia, stripped them of anything they had and used them as a shell to market a failing OS (windows).

  2. Avatar

    jimchamplin

    Well uh...


    I don't think we can watch that outside of the UK? :(


    I kinda wish we could!

  3. Avatar

    johnh3

    About the "new" Nokia (HMD Global) they seems to expanding fast. Local phone manufacturing in India, Indonesia and soon in Argentina. I guess thats why they have released a lot of low and middle budget devices so far.

    Recently they also get new investors with a huge invest in money so the business going fine I think.


    In September (possible att the IFA event in Germany) we might see a real Nokia flagship to that may compete with the best Samsung, Huawei, Sony, LG and Apple got. As a old Nokia fan its a special feeling to see the brand coming back to alive.

    • Avatar

      Jules Wombat

      In reply to johnh3:

      They are also investing (all that Microsoft) money into leading 5G infrastructure through Europe. So Nokia looking to being doing pretty well.

      The BBC documentary was actually a redubbed foreign documentary which seemed to place the blame on overindulgent Nokia management, getting lazy on success and losing the socialist equitable management values that made it so successful over the last thirty years in mobile. Little to no mention of Microsoft and Elop.

      They acknowledged being Shocked and unable to respond to the iPhone, despite an attempt with the Meego development.

      • Avatar

        Hassan Timité

        In reply to Jules_Wombat:

        They were unable to respond to the iPhone because they use the wrong O.S to compete. They had two O.S Symbian and Maemo. When they tried to counter the iPhone they chose to use Symbian when the most tailored O.S was Maemo, which was already touch optimized while Symbian was not. And to add salt to the injury their hardware,despite being of high quality, was dramatically underpowered compared to the need of their O.S. They understood their mistake too late. If they had chosen to go with Maemo instead of Symbian and if they had used powerful enough hardware, history could have quite different.

Leave a Reply