Nokia also didn't get the whole movie tie-in thing. The version of the Nokia 8110 featured in The Matrix didn't exist as a purchasable product. This defeats the purpose of product placement.
I had that phone to develop content for it. Ah, wap and page deck days... or something.
It was fricking cool. The same phone as neo. With a feature that they left out of the final cut in the film. ...Aim lower end of phone at someone a few feet away, press button, laugh as target takes a piece of plastic to the face.
That started to happen a few months after we got the phone. So it's pretty obvious why it never 'existed' as a consumer product.
They did later release the Nokia 7110 which had the spring-loaded cover, so I guess they got it to work. The phone in the second movie is not even a Nokia, it is a Samsung SPH-N270. Samsung sold it as a limited edition.
1. I don't believe it's an accurate statement to say Nokia is dead (if even as a stand-alone company). They have several great things going for them today, it's just hard to see if you're not looking beyond the current quarter or two (which I've found is a common symptom of blindness).
2. I don't believe it's an accurate statement to say they flushed every piece of software they have ever built down the toilet. Firstly, they're still releasing non-WP phones. Secondly, a lot of their skills are in innovating within hardware, which they're very much still doing great stuff with.
3. The takeaway from the article is that if you are a tech company, you shouldn't become a media company (or get into media). Firstly, wouldn't Apple, Google, and Microsoft have never entered the media industry if they would've followed this? Secondly, this takeaway is a great example of the innovators dilemma [1]. The two opposing strategies could just as well lead to failure -- a. Following this "takeaway" advice and being too afraid to join new "value markets" (e.g. innovating within media), and so you just keep on running with what works [3a]; and b. Not following this takeaway advice because you realize you can't stay on top forever with your current strategy, and so you make an attempt to enter new disruptive markets even if it means cannibalizing yourself [3b].
[3a] I think this blanket advice has problems -- media may have been a good thing to get into because the media integration could have caused (or did?) a major disruption in the existing market (I believe this was Nokia's belief and a cause for why they did what they did). Thus not trying new things like this could cause failure as well, as new players enter the market and take their marketshare (e.g. Apple with music and media at its core).
> 2. I don't believe it's an accurate statement to say they flushed every piece of software they have ever built down the toilet. Firstly, they're still releasing non-WP phones. Secondly, a lot of their skills are in innovating within hardware, which they're very much still doing great stuff with.
Ehh... While Nokia does still have a significant number of non-WP phones, most of them are "feature phones" (non-smartphones). With the price differential of smartphones plummeting at its current rate, even as the phones become more powerful, I strongly suspect that the "feature phone" market is going to largely evaporate outside developing nations within the next few years.
(The remainder of Nokia's phones are running Symbian OS, which is widely regarded to be an evolutionary dead end. Nokia, unaccountably, still has some phones in the pipeline which will use Symbian, but I doubt there will be many more, nor that they will be very popular.)
As far as hardware innovation goes, as long as Nokia sticks with Windows they're going to be pretty limited in that respect. My understanding is that Microsoft has some pretty strict hardware guidelines for WP7+ devices.
I agree most of the non-WP phones are feature phones (though the Aisha line is on the border from my understanding), and that feature phones are going to evaporate outside developing nations, however the "developing nations market" is still very large and potentially very lucrative.
the fastest growing market in developing nations is the low cost smartphone at $50 or less. Nokia is getting killed in all three areas equally, combined that with being Osborned once by the CEO and once by MS as a partner and you have the current Nokia junk bond status situation.
While Nokia does still have a significant number of non-WP phones, most of them are "feature phones" (non-smartphones)
Arguably anything running Symbian is a smartphone, Nokia just put a crippled featurephone user interface on it. They were way ahead of the smartphone curve, unfortunately way ahead of the market too.
None of Nokia's feature phones run Symbian, they run Series 40, a Nokia developed software platform and UI. Series 40 is not capable of the functionality that true smart phone OS's like Symbian, Maemo or Windows Phone 7.
I'm also not sure it's true that Nokia were way ahead of the market, as their competitors (such as Ericsson) were producing smart phones every bit as impressive as Nokia's early efforts. They did make a good start, but they were not unchallenged.
> I strongly suspect that the "feature phone" market is going to largely evaporate outside developing nations within the next few years.
I strongly suspect that's going to happen in developing nations as well.
You can get an unlocked 3G Huawei android 2.1 phone for $80 in the US. The cheapest usable unlocked feature phone you can get in the US is $15-$20. (You can occasionally get a $10 2-band GSM phone that has no screen and can't do texts -- I'm ignoring that)
Feature phones are going away. Developing nations will just have less capable smartphones, with lower resolution screens, slower processors and old operating systems. But they'll be almost entirely smartphones.
1. I'm pretty sure that officially Nokia can be announced dead only when it will bankrupt or will be bought but currently it is walking dead man. In my opinion Microsoft will buy Nokia while everything might be more fun actually. There is nothing anymore what could make Nokia profitable again as it is. At least I don't see anything.
2. What new apart PureView technology I have in my Nokia 808 I could not get in other phones and still consider innovative in hardware? I really find PureView interesting but overall I'm not satisfied with it - it is not that much better than N8 (http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/features/item/15051_Nokia_N8_...). I really would love to see PureView in DSLR camera but not in smartphone.
I love Nokia phones but let's be fair - Nokia as we know is dead. Future of Windows Phone Nokia is uncertain and personally I as developer don't care about it being successful.
Concerning 1: What about their Lumia and future Windows Phone line? Or their future tablets? I agree that the future of Windows Phone is uncertain, but it has been gaining a lot of popularity, press, and very high customer satisfaction lately. With Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 coming out soon, I believe it has a lot of potential. For example, I often speak with Android users and I don't often come across an Android user that loves their device (unless they're very techy). Meaning, it just doesn't seem to be for the mass market. Alternatively, WP phone is extremely simple.
The reason I say this is because if the above is true, there's a good possibility Nokia will be the ones selling the vast majority of WP phones, and there's a seriously large market for the range of devices WP can run on.
Concerning 2: Just curious, what's the main thing about PureView that got you interested in it and got you to buy it?
1. We will see. I really don't know but I really don't care as well. WP7 is already nice - I have played a little bit with it but I don't care about it. It is good but it is boring. I don't like it (N950 with poor hardware is much more interesting). My next phone will be Android most probably (while BlackBerry 10, Tizen or bada are considerable options as well). I'm open source/free culture geek and if I can I will avoid walled gardens what WP is.
2. I don't bought it I won it in Nokia's PureView competition. I personally wouldn't spend 700$ on this phone - there are better ways to spend such amount of money that I consider big enough for me. I could buy Samsung Galaxy S3 for this amount of money.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't nokia still the biggest seller of mobile phones worldwide, by number of units shipped? not smartphones sure, but just general mobile phones.
25 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 66.6 ms ] threadhttp://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/ar...
Other phones came with popular bands.
After reading this article, I understand why they did.
It was fricking cool. The same phone as neo. With a feature that they left out of the final cut in the film. ...Aim lower end of phone at someone a few feet away, press button, laugh as target takes a piece of plastic to the face.
That started to happen a few months after we got the phone. So it's pretty obvious why it never 'existed' as a consumer product.
1. I don't believe it's an accurate statement to say Nokia is dead (if even as a stand-alone company). They have several great things going for them today, it's just hard to see if you're not looking beyond the current quarter or two (which I've found is a common symptom of blindness).
2. I don't believe it's an accurate statement to say they flushed every piece of software they have ever built down the toilet. Firstly, they're still releasing non-WP phones. Secondly, a lot of their skills are in innovating within hardware, which they're very much still doing great stuff with.
3. The takeaway from the article is that if you are a tech company, you shouldn't become a media company (or get into media). Firstly, wouldn't Apple, Google, and Microsoft have never entered the media industry if they would've followed this? Secondly, this takeaway is a great example of the innovators dilemma [1]. The two opposing strategies could just as well lead to failure -- a. Following this "takeaway" advice and being too afraid to join new "value markets" (e.g. innovating within media), and so you just keep on running with what works [3a]; and b. Not following this takeaway advice because you realize you can't stay on top forever with your current strategy, and so you make an attempt to enter new disruptive markets even if it means cannibalizing yourself [3b].
[3a] I think this blanket advice has problems -- media may have been a good thing to get into because the media integration could have caused (or did?) a major disruption in the existing market (I believe this was Nokia's belief and a cause for why they did what they did). Thus not trying new things like this could cause failure as well, as new players enter the market and take their marketshare (e.g. Apple with music and media at its core).
[3b] Though Nokia failed at it.
[1] http://www.amazon.com/The-Innovators-Dilemma-Revolutionary-B...
Ehh... While Nokia does still have a significant number of non-WP phones, most of them are "feature phones" (non-smartphones). With the price differential of smartphones plummeting at its current rate, even as the phones become more powerful, I strongly suspect that the "feature phone" market is going to largely evaporate outside developing nations within the next few years.
(The remainder of Nokia's phones are running Symbian OS, which is widely regarded to be an evolutionary dead end. Nokia, unaccountably, still has some phones in the pipeline which will use Symbian, but I doubt there will be many more, nor that they will be very popular.)
As far as hardware innovation goes, as long as Nokia sticks with Windows they're going to be pretty limited in that respect. My understanding is that Microsoft has some pretty strict hardware guidelines for WP7+ devices.
Arguably anything running Symbian is a smartphone, Nokia just put a crippled featurephone user interface on it. They were way ahead of the smartphone curve, unfortunately way ahead of the market too.
I'm also not sure it's true that Nokia were way ahead of the market, as their competitors (such as Ericsson) were producing smart phones every bit as impressive as Nokia's early efforts. They did make a good start, but they were not unchallenged.
I strongly suspect that's going to happen in developing nations as well.
You can get an unlocked 3G Huawei android 2.1 phone for $80 in the US. The cheapest usable unlocked feature phone you can get in the US is $15-$20. (You can occasionally get a $10 2-band GSM phone that has no screen and can't do texts -- I'm ignoring that)
Feature phones are going away. Developing nations will just have less capable smartphones, with lower resolution screens, slower processors and old operating systems. But they'll be almost entirely smartphones.
2. What new apart PureView technology I have in my Nokia 808 I could not get in other phones and still consider innovative in hardware? I really find PureView interesting but overall I'm not satisfied with it - it is not that much better than N8 (http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/features/item/15051_Nokia_N8_...). I really would love to see PureView in DSLR camera but not in smartphone.
I love Nokia phones but let's be fair - Nokia as we know is dead. Future of Windows Phone Nokia is uncertain and personally I as developer don't care about it being successful.
- Happy Nokia PureView 808 owner
The reason I say this is because if the above is true, there's a good possibility Nokia will be the ones selling the vast majority of WP phones, and there's a seriously large market for the range of devices WP can run on.
Concerning 2: Just curious, what's the main thing about PureView that got you interested in it and got you to buy it?
2. I don't bought it I won it in Nokia's PureView competition. I personally wouldn't spend 700$ on this phone - there are better ways to spend such amount of money that I consider big enough for me. I could buy Samsung Galaxy S3 for this amount of money.