The real reason Nokia went with Windows Phone instead of Android


For a long time coming, Nokia’s resistance to join Android was portrayed by the Finnish company with a stern stance. Then-executive Anssi Vanjoki even joked about it, saying an OEM using Android is like a Finnish boy peeing their pants for warmth in the winter. That’s a statement that never fails to pop to the front of our minds every time we think about their Android-powered Nokia X line.


It appears that comment was more truthful than it was funny, though, with Nokia’s latest explanation injecting a lot more sense into it. In a recent ask me anything session, CEO Stephen Elop recently revealed the reasoning behind going with Windows Phone instead of Android:

When we made the decision to focus on Windows Phone back in 2011, we were very concerned that a decision to pursue Android would put us on a collision course with Samsung, who already had established a head of steam around Android. That was the right decision, as we have seen virtually all other OEMs from those days pushed to the side.

It seems Elop was right, because not even the once-dominant HTC is able to overcome Samsung’s stranglehold on the Android smartphone market. The HTC One from yesteryear and this year’s follow-up are great smartphones, but HTC is still finding it difficult to sell enough units to stay in the black.

The Taiwanese company has seen declining profits and revenue for months now (they were in the red last quarter), and have even suffered their first consecutive quarters with net operating losses. It’s not enough of a drop to count HTC out just yet, but it’s enough to make us worried about their future.


And HTC isn’t the only competing smartphone manufacturer in tough waters. Sony, LG, Motorola and more are finding it difficult to find solid footing in these races despite coming forth with their strongest products yet in recent months.


It’s not as if Nokia is doing much better than any of them, though. Windows Phone itself still plays second fiddle to Android and iOS, and by a very large margin. Microsoft only owns about 3.4% of the US smartphone market share last we heard, and Nokia likely commands a vast majority of that. The global numbers figure to show a similar trend.

Of noteworthy mention is Nokia going back on their own word and releasing the Nokia X line, though Elop contends they did that to attack a specific need in specific markets, and not to try and cash-in quick on Android’s insane success.

So what’s the difference between Nokia and other Android-focused OEMs? The difference is that their focus on Windows Phone has allowed them to stand out in a new ecosystem, which is a major reason why Microsoft was interested enough to close the books on a deal that would see them acquiring the manufacturer.

Should Microsoft do the unthinkable and find a breakthrough moment with Windows Phone to steal a considerable amount of market share from iOS and Android, Nokia (or Microsoft?) will be first in line to reap the benefits of that. That’s a lot more than any other Android OEM not named “Samsung” can say.

[via Neowin]

Quentyn Kennemer
The "Google Phone" sounded too awesome to pass up, so I bought a G1. The rest is history. And yes, I know my name isn't Wilson.

Google Self Driving Cars update shows huge strides in road autonomy [VIDEO]

Previous article

Sprint LG G Flex now receiving Android 4.4 KitKat

Next article

You may also like


  1. This makes total sense. Good job Nokia, hope they do well because we need the competition with crappy Samsung in the lead

    1. Windows phone is less competition for Samsung than HTC. Nokia effectively took themselves out of competition with Samsung simply because Microsoft can float them.

  2. That was the right choice? Says someone who just had their company sold to MS because of their total failure in the market place?

    MS paid Nokia to use Windows Phone and sent in Elop to finish the job. Either they would get buy a foothold in the market or they would buy Nokia for peanuts.

  3. It’s great that Samsung has been successful, but their dominance of the Android phone market is terrible for the health of the Android ecosystem.

    1. That’s exactly my problem with them. I have no problem at all with Samsung or their products, but I can’t bring myself to support a company that has so close to a monopoly, and risks dominating and stagnating the entire product space. It’s not good for anyone, not even the die-hard Samsung fans.

      1. Putting samsung and stagnation in the same phrase is really a mistake.

        1. I’m not saying they’re not innovating anything now; I’m not even getting into that sort of hardware fanboy war. My point is that they have a massive lead on the industry and they could easily end up being the -only- major player. If that happens, you can bet they won’t be doing much innovating anymore; there’s no drive for that without competition.

          1. Massive lead? What about apple and their over $130Bi? Microsoft last time I checked had 80 billion dollars in their safe… and Google? Amazon? Maybe massive lead in android eco system smartphones but that doesn’t mean they are not worried, or working hard. No other behemoth company releases more products than Samsung and probably right now no one innovates more than them. I see that what u say could happen… but that’s just far from reality right now… specially with the smartphone and tablet segments reaching saturation… no one wants to be the next Motorola or Nokia, or even HP and Dell for that matter…

      2. You’d rather support a company that limits your options? Samsung is the ONLY company that still offers consumers SD card slot, removable battery, unlocked bootloader, great screen, and great SoC. Why do every other idiot company remove the SD card / removable battery in an attempt to copy Apple? Screw the other companies if they don’t want to offer options to the consumers. Samsung is the ONLY one that I will consistently buy until the other fools listen to consumers.

    2. But its a necessary evil without a leader in Android ecosystem Android would fall and be no more.You can’t blame samsung for the popularity somebody has to compete with iOs and the people of Android chose with their money that it was going to be Samsung.

      1. I don’t suspect that it’d fail and be no more or any such, but it would require Google to step up and actually manage and market the platform, which is something that they’ve not done much of thus far. Being largely beholden to Samsung is dangerous since Samsung’s interests don’t necessarily coincide with Google’s.

        1. Someone needed to take point and become the alpha competitor and they decided to be that. Shame on Sony, HTC and LG for not trying harder and better sooner. Business is fierce, ruthless and unforgiving. Big boys only. I want more healthier options myself. The more true competition the better for consumers. Sony’s been the real letdown for me personally. So much potential for their Xperia series.

    3. Thank god for Samsung! Can u imagine a world fully dominated by Apple? Ugh!!

  4. Samsung is good for me. I love their products, but a lot of the true Android fans dislike them because of TW’s interface. Casual Android users don’t mind it either. I like their success as well and don’t mind their Android domination.

    1. I dislike them because of the way they handled Nexus 10 customer service. I spent 3 MONTHS getting a BRAND NEW Nexus 10 fixed.

      1. I recently bought a Galaxy Note Pro 12.2, and it had a dead pixel. It only took me about a week of emailing back and forth before they sent me a shipping label to send it in for repair. It should be coming back today. So I would have to say that your experience isn’t typical. However, I do think their support structure could use some work. I could never respond to the emails, I always had to click a link, and send a new email and attach the ticket number…that was definitely annoying.

        1. There was that, and the ridiculous shifting of responsibilities. Here’s my story:

          This was actually VERY typical of service on the Nexus 10 line, whereas I always hear good things about the Galaxy line.

        2. Why not just return it and get a better one?

        3. Always call in.

      2. That’s why you ask for a refund. I had a similar issue with the Nexus 7, so don’t blame Samsung. It’s Google. ASUS is not a ban manufacturer. Google had ghosting on the OG Nexus 7 and they wouldn’t want to replace it.

        1. See my below post on it. Samsung is the manufacturer. They are responsible for the hardware, Google for the software. They provide no service on the website and in fact, you cannot request an RMA online at all, as opposed to providing plenty of support for the Galaxy line and OTHER Nexus products they’ve made. Hell, the Galaxy Nexus even still has its own department. It’s like saying that if I buy an HP, Microsoft should provide the support, not HP, for the hardware. After all, Microsoft wrote the software, even if the HP has their official branding.

          1. No, it’s not. My Nexus 7 documents said to contact Google for any issues. They replaced my Nexus 4 a few times themselves even though it’s LG. I am not going to argue this further.

          2. They’ve done something different with the Nexus 10,then. I have my original box and paperwork in hand. It all says that Samsung is responsible for hardware maintenance. Maybe it’s different if I bought it at a retail store

  5. All my friends that get Samsung phones don’t like them. LoL!!

    Then they get mad at me for letting them get it. I’m like, “You’re the one following the bandwagon.”

    Samsung phones always seem to have some odd issues with them. No matter what device they bring out. Issues with software updates from updating Android to the now camera issue.

    What is really going on?

    1. All smartphones have those little issues you mentioned, but you don’t ever hear about the other brands because their market share is so small. Just read one of the carrier’s online forums with complaints.

      1. I know phones have weird issues, but it’s how widespread they are. Though you do mention about their market share. Guess that’s why you would hear more about Samsung devices and iPhones messing up.

        5% of 100 is more than 5% of 10.

    2. Because there is a LOT of Galaxy devices, which is why they’re heard more often.

  6. I disagree on Elop’s view on not choosing Android in the first place. Back in 2011 Nokia had a markewwwt rep much higher than in the end of it. Samsung cashed in on the opportunity only because of the produxt diversity strategy that it only learned from Nokia’s golden days.

    Nokia completely underestimated their market rep and went on ambushing it’s own echo system by moving to a mobile OS that in the first place was never a good one. Had they embraced Android then and used their pioneering industry knowledge there was a good chance that Markus Brownly’s favourite smart phone would have been an Androided Nokia E99.

    1. true. back then Nokia was today’s Samsung. They could have chosen android and still be at the top, or better, they could have pushed Meego and still be at the top(back then Meego was WAY AHEAD of android).

    2. Elop came from MS, there was never a chance he would not do WindowsPhone.

    3. Windows Phone is so much better than Android and has been for a while. And somewhat better than iOS and has been for a while. The only strong suite on the other phones is the amount of apps, and everyday Windows closes the gap further.

      1. The Amount of FREE apps on Android is the big thing of why its competing with iOs aside from having a real homescreen. Windows Phone isn’t closing any gap. Windows Phone is not better than android in any way shape or form. What is it thats better about Windows Phone that Android doesn’t already do and have been doing for years on end? Windows phone isn’t cheaper to buy. The only advantage to WP8.1 or 8 is that Nokia backs it.

        1. Windows Phone has been faster than Android since the days of WP7 without the need of dual core processors or large amounts of memory. Windows Phone doesn’t suffer from slow down, lag and freezing issues as time goes by like Android does. Windows Phone doesnt suffer from phones getting left behind without updates and chefs having to cook custom roms. Windows Phone doesn’t suffer App fragmentation to the extent Android does where some phones cant download lots of apps that others can. Windows Phone had ZERO apps three years ago. Today it has well over 200,000 and now that everything is getting merged with Windows 8 and Xbox One, apps could more than double in less than a year. How is going from zero to more than a quarter of a million NOT closing the app gap? There’s so many useless apps on Android anyway… Same for iOS. In case you didn’t know Windows is practically as open as Android is: You can download files from the browser, download torrents, manage your files whether on internal memory or external memory on your computer, upload any kind of file right in the browser… Cortana kills Google Now and shes just an unreleased beta test right now. Cameras in Windows Phones, especially Nokias, make all Android cameras look pitiful by comparison… so tell me… How is Android better?

          1. False just look at any windows phone tmobile has had, HTC Radar HTC 8x nokia 521…. The very first batch of windows phones were subject to not being able to receive windows phone 8. Microsoft started with zero and continued to pay developers to even look into developing for the system. There is no such thing as fragmentation on android as many would leave you to believe anymore maybe in the first iteration but since All apps are backwards compatible Android 2.3 to 4.x are the same apps. Microsoft them selves led you to believe that they don’t need high dollar processors and ram etc etc but then why are there many wp7 devices left in the dust? While 200k may seem to be a lot 1 billion apps is where android and iOs are at. Cortana does not indeed kill Google now aass I’ve seen in many reviews. Windows phone camera would be crap without nokia and their partner carl zeiss but even then that not windows phone that is nokia.

          2. T-Mobile is the one holding those updates. Go to the Microsoft website, register (for FREE) as an app developer, and magically your update arrives, no matter what carrier you are on. It is T-Mobile holding it, not Microsoft. Good luck doing something like that on Android with Google. If Samsung, HTC or Motorla choose to leave behind your Android phone from 6 months ago and only focus on their latest, you are doomed forever and that’s it, even if the phone is more than capable of running the last Android build. Again, you seem to have all these misconceptions and prejudices against Windows Phone and clearly don’t own one or haven’t owned one. The only phone to get left behind was the WP7 Lumia 900 which didn’t get WP8 and it was still a new phone when WP8 came out. The other WP7 phones received updates for the duration of the 2 year cycle after they were releaed, which is far more than the updates anyone gets on the Android side of things or on iOS. Only the Google Nexus is guaranteed to be updated for 2 years. Fragmentation on Android exists and I have used Android phones and own one: If you dont have the latest Android build, you cant download the latest version of many apps. Period. If you have an underpowered phone, you can’t download LOTS of games. That is very different from the iOS App store and the Windows Phone store, where VERY RARELY lower spec phones can’t run some apps. In Android it is VERY common to run into apps and games only the latest phones can install and run. And 1 billion? Don’t make up numbers. Windows Phone is on its way to 300,000 apps. Android has 1 MILLION and iOS about the same. Windows Phone is growing at a faster rate when it comes to apps and will catch up in 2-3 years from now. Clearly you havent used a Windows Phone… Cortana is much more advanced than even Siri, which already was more advanced than Google Now. You are biased against Windows Phone. Your loss though. You miss the superior experience… And anyone who says ANY phone out there takes better photos than the Lumia 1020, Lumia 1520 and Lumia Icon, either is blind or crazy… or biased like you.

          3. Windows Phone is not faster than android in any way of the word, even more so I still have not heard what Windows Phone does that Android does not already do. Fragmentation is a old biased argument as android like linux has many flavors.

          4. You should get out there in the world. A Lumia 1520 and a Lumia Icon is faster than even an iPhone 5S which practically sets the standard for speed/responsiveness/smoothness. Not even the Galaxy S5 can match the smoothness and responsiveness of an iPhone 5S, but the latest Windows Phones do it amazingly. You seem to be stuck in the WP7 days or something and the last phones you tried are from years ago, and still back then WP7 was smoother. Go to AT&T or a Microsoft store and check some of the latest phones.

      2. Windows phone scrolls too slow, has gigantic cropped text and just takes longer to do things. As much as I originally wanted a Windows phone, I keep getting disappointed. It’s not even named accurately.

  7. That’s an interesting way of spinning it, but no. He picked microsoft because he was late to the android party.
    It was a bad decision, and it still is.
    Even if the spin was true, nokia would still have done better adopting android than windows phone.
    And yes, windows phone would be anything but dead.

    1. Or even more likely because that was his previous employer, and they paid Nokia to use it.

  8. LOL, Nokia conceding defeat? That was a patently dumb move. They would have already had the recognition and marketing to compete.

    HTC doesn’t count. While they make great phones they suffer from the STUPIDEST marketing campaigns. I’m not sure why HTC sticks with the terrible marketing strategy that put them in the dumpster.

  9. Don’t buy it. I hear this all the time. Nokia had many aspects of hardware design that were superior to Samsung. They were known for great call quality, they had amazing camera tech, their clear black screen tech was very promising. A Nokia phone with a standard Android stack would have done just fine. I have a Samsung myself, and I would have chosen Nokia probably had they not gone with Windows.

    1. sadly doesn’t matter if you have superior tech when a brand name is what general public cares about

      1. and Nokia _was_ one of the top brand associated with phones back in the day. we are not talking about Nokia today, we are talking about Nokia back in 2008-2011/

        1. Nokia should have listened to its customers when people were screaming for a Android Nokia and the Nokia X is not one. If Nokia just continued with Symbian they would still be better off than with Microsoft.

      2. It wasn’t a brand name that got Samsung on top of the game. Go back in time, and you have the original Android phones, the HTC G1 and the HTC Hero. Fast forward a little, and now you have the original Nexus One (HTC), the HTC Evo, and the Motorola Droid. These were the top-selling phones, and HTC was at the top of the heap. However, none of these are available on all carriers. Along comes Samsung, already looked down upon because of their failed Behold II line, and they do something revolutionary. They offer phones on all carriers with removable batteries, expandable storage, good screens, good SoC’s, good cameras, and unlocked bootloaders. Instant hit. They learn from their biggest fail, which was allowing each US carrier to customize and rename the OG Galaxy S phone. When round 2 comes along, the Galaxy S II gets an identical release and name on almost every carrier in the world. Continuing the trend of being the only OEM in the world that offers all choices to the consumer in regards to battery, storage, and bootloader while still offering a quality phone, the Galaxy S II (and every successive flagship device Samsung offered) became the phone to beat (including by Apple!)

        Did marketing budget hurt? No. Did name recognition help? You bet. Nokia had both of those, too, and they could have easily done what Samsung succeeded in doing. Bottom line, though, it wasn’t money or a name that got people to choose the Galaxy or Note phones. Make no mistake, it was the product. Samsung made a huge bet when they didn’t sign exclusivity contracts, and made their phones the one of choice. That bet paid off in spades.

  10. lol sure, I can say that right now when I see samsung dominated the android market.

  11. Wrong choice Nokia, by using Windows they never gave older Nokia fans a chance, by then Android already had a strong foothold and few people wanted to change over to Windows.

  12. that’s fly vomit.

    They are ‘solid’ devices. But nothing in the windows ecosystem really stands out until now. Getting in bed with android would have attracted all of those symbian users who defected to iOS and Android back. The place they would have been in would be totally different from today (which is gone).

    MS paid the company to use it’s product, made a good product, the took the company. It’s no longer Nokia, it’s Microsoft. Gone like Danger.

    BUT I will say this. I’d buy one of those phones for the camera.

  13. So Nokia tried avoiding competition because they would lose against Samsung? Instead they decided to play with Microsoft’s OS which will be dead in a couple years I’m sure or rather redesigned again due to unpopularity

  14. Sure Elop was “sorta” right…but pointing to HTC as an example of a company not being able to compete is a bit misleading. The reason HTC has fallen is because they had some crap phones. You know how many people I know who went to apple because their only example of how Android performed was the EVO? How about the Thunderbolt? Crap phone after crap phone….While Samsung introduced the GS2 and 3. If Nokia would have gone Android…and released solid products that werent too complicated and kept and updated release schedule, they would be slugging it out with Samsung right now.

  15. “It seems Elop was right, because not even the once-dominant HTC is able to overcome Samsung’s stranglehold on the Android smartphone market.”
    Wrong look at LG, Sony and those Chinese OEM’s. HTC is down coz of they are over-zealous and their inability to adapt to the current situation.
    Nokia made the move ONLY coz of some zealous nokia execs looking for fast cash that MS was ready to shed… dumb movie from a company perspective and a great move for selfish individuals point of view…

    1. HTC has made several boneheaded decisions.

      1. No removable battery. If you want to do that, you better have a solid battery life. Which their phones didn’t.
      2. No removable Storage. If you do that, you better have at least 32GB in internal storage. They didn’t until the M7.
      3. Not enough RAM. If you are going to do that, you better make sure that your launcher doesn’t hog memory. Else you will have gimped multi-tasking like the One X.
      4. Terrible OS updates. Samsung went from back of the class to head. HTC on the other hand went from head to locked bootloaders and being positively hostile to XDA.
      5. Poor distribution of the phones in the US. Locked to one carrier for a few months. Unable to deliver to others. Bad supply chain management.

      A couple of these could be a death knell against an efficient competitor. Together, they are an unholy perfect storm. HTC never released the perfect phone (and still hasn’t). The EVO had a superb kickstand. They never added it to any other phone. Such a simple feature, but so useful! They had a great optical trackball on the Desire, but stopped adding it later. They had a nice design for a replaceable battery (albeit too small) in one of their earlier phones (desire?legend?), but gave up on that. Even on M8, they have dropped the internal storage and the battery is still too small.

      I had the Samsung Galaxy, the S2. I really really wanted to buy the One X, but bought the S3. Last year I wanted the One, but got the LG G2. Both have been better phones than the HTC counterpart. They have managed to make almost perfect devices only to screw up in some way or another. I hope my next phone will be an HTC. But they had better get everything right. First and foremost, they have to stop locking the bootloader and release their binary radios. I don’t want to end up with a phone makes it difficult even for the open source community to continue supporting.

  16. Nokia made android phones would have sold a lot more than ‘lumia’ branded phones than they have now up to this point period.

    1. Their hardware was so wonderful I would have loved to see some of their phones running Android long ago.

  17. Nokia was probably the best company to take on Samsung in the Android space.

    The reason that Samsung succeeded is because the Galaxy S phones were released on every carrier and they gave their phones the features people wanted most (great screens and good processors). Motorola has been mostly a Verizon exclusive with few phones for every else (with a few phones for AT&T and Sprint and when was the last Motorola phone sold by T-Mobile) and the screens on their phones were not quite up to snuff. HTC has made phones with excellent build quality, but often hampered the phones with weak battery life. LG was mostly miss on their early phones but the G series has been very solid. Sony mostly has lacked direction and often seem to behind the others when it comes to releasing their flagship phones.

    1. Samsung is the manufacturer of choice. Expandable storage, replaceable battery, and unlocked bootloader. They are the only manufacturer that offers all of that, plus quality screens, cameras, and SoC’s. To threaten their crown, someone will have to offer all of the above, and fast updates, too.

      1. I don’t care about threatening their crown, I just wanna quality Nokia running Android ;)

      2. The options factor is huge in that regard. If expandable storage and replaceable batteries were not important like many claim they would not be selling so well. Would it have been that difficult for Sony, HTC and LG to do that from the start with their flagship devices? I would have been a regular customer of any of those companies long ago if they offered the same staple options. I do believe expandable storage and removable batteries should be a standard feature in flagship phones rather than just a luxury.

        1. Amen, amen

    2. You’re right about the availability factor of these great devices from those massive companies. Samsung went balls deep with their availability. Why didn’t Sony or Motorola do that early on? Why did they keep going to AT&T and Verizon with some of their Xperia and Droid series phones?

      So many carriers in the US and massive companies like Sony decide to ink exclusive deals with only ONE of them. Honest question, I’m wondering how many exclusive deals Samsung has made with any of their flagship devices? Can you imagine a device like the S5 or Note 3 being JUST as successful if AT&T or Verizon were the only ones selling it? Let’s just think about how weird that even sounds.

      HTC seems to have gotten the message. They’re selling their flagship devices on more carriers which gives consumers more options. My biggest annoyance among all these is Sony. How slow and inconsistent have their flagship device releses been? Does the average consumer know which carrier today sells the Xperia Z2? I don’t know. Does the average consumer know where the S5 or Note 3 is being sold? Yeah, everyone and their mother is selling it on their network. I hate to keep using them as an example but Samsung seems to know how to be the alpha competitor with these mobile devies. Why hasn’t the likes of Sony and HTC done the same?

      1. no one in the US sells the Z2. its almost impossible to get a sony z2 unlocked to use in the US unless you buy unlocked online. right now most are still preorder sales

        1. Another reason why Sony’s lagging behind the big boys here in America. Such a waste of potential.

    3. HTC’s bigg problem was only releasing the HTC evo and evo 3d only to sprint. Most of the flagship devices came to Sprint only here in the US. Motorola did the same thing with their droid series. LG did the same as well until recently by releasing the G2 on every carrier. Sony hasnt been in the US as of late besides on ATT. a phone on ATT and one on Tmobile isnt going to cut it. Other manufactures can take market share back and possibly surpass samsung however it will take some time. I can see Motorola or LG taking a good chunk from Samsung in the near future

      1. Yes, I agree. Sony especially goddamn… Why won’t they blanket the US carrier market with this beautiful devices?

  18. Ironically Nokia were very well placed to differentiate their own range of Android handsets. With a mature Mapping app / infrastructure, huge camera experience (plus a partnership with Carl Zeiss), and a well regarded industrial design team, plus years of experience with things like power management and signal optimisation, they could have been where Samsung are now.

    That’s what happens when you have bright people led by idiots. All that talent, squandered.

  19. LG is making the right moves, getting back-to-back NEXUS devices and the G2 and not to mention getting peoples attention with the G Flex. I can see them stepping up to number two Android OEM

    1. As long as they keep blanketing their flagship devices across ALL major carriers in America they’ll be healthy and in true competition with Samsung. Samsung has done just as well as Apple in educating the GENERAL consumer with their effective adverts, LG and others need to be competitive in that regard.

  20. It’s too bad Elop missed the fact that a lot Android users wanted a phone of Nokia quality, much better than Samsung. The Verge along with other tech bloggers criticized Android manufacturers for making sub-par hardware while lauding Nokia for it’s iPhone-like quality.

    1. I agree, make a high-end Lumia running Android, preferably vanilla and I’m all in…better hardware than any Samsung device IMO.
      Ordered a couple of “broken” 920’s off eBay these last couple of days to “play with” and satisfy my curiosity.

  21. I completely disagree with all owner and Ellop’s opinions ‘.
    1) Nokia could be successfull in Android market event with Samsung.
    2) HTC is a tiny company that only operates in a dozen countries. It is very weak.
    3) HTC was nothing until get Android. It increase its size more than 4x in few months and they abandoned android to invest in Windows in 2011 and 2012.
    4) LG wasnt great because of weak design of its phones and not successfull phones with 3d and data show(bean).
    5) Sony was always crap because of high price and super lazy releases and updates to their phones, even with amazing designs.
    6) Motorola saved itself from bankruptcy when they get Android. Sony too.

    Nokia had 60% world market share in 2007. Im sure if they got Android before, even with some delay in 2010 or 2011, they would not have been sold.

  22. Lire un article sur article de téléphone cellulaire, ne sais pas encore sur ce téléphone ?

  23. You guys said it all.

  24. Windows phone operating system is very good the problem with it is the lack of apps and that it what is holding the platform back and the fact yo have to pay for alot of the apps that are free on android does not help this is what needs to be changed and now microsoft has nokia I hope things will begin to change

    1. True, but at least wp8 doesn’t stuff ads down your throat with they’re free apps. I’d gladly pay for apps on windows phone..

  25. What a bunch of bullshit! Nokia had the best distribution channels in the world (except USA), a privileged relationship with carriers and the most appreciated brand in the world. They weren´t newcomers.

  26. Everyone claims to want a Nokia-quality Android phone but then why is HTC still losing money if the One (and the new One) are even better build quality than the iPhone. Nokia made the right play and it paid off gloriously for them in the long run.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More in News