View Single Post
Posts: 207 | Thanked: 552 times | Joined on Jul 2011
#1099
@Lumiaman
I actually asked for data not an opinion piece (that you have copied without citation) but anyhow...

If you reread the piece you have copied you'll see NOKIA's original plan of MeeGo, Symbian and Meltemi with Qt as a common framework much better addressed what this article identified as NOKIA's problem than a change to Windows Phone did.

Let me quote from your own post:
Originally Posted by Lumiaman View Post
IHS Screen Digest analyst Daniel Gleeson makes a similar point: Nokia wasn’t thinking big enough when it really counted – and without a grand plan they weren’t able to act decisively to fix the strategic weaknesses that were being exploited by others. “Their emphasis was on incremental innovation of existing products rather than aggressively pushing a disruptive innovation,” he says.

“Their smartphone strategy was muddled at the time to put it politely,” he adds. “Symbian was the principal OS, but with Maemo/MeeGo also in development; Nokia was far from clear in its long-term commitment to either platform. Even if it could execute well, overly risk-averse management prevented Nokia making this decision. By attempting to juggle both, Nokia showed another fundamental problem, it did not understand the importance of ecosystems.”

The Significance Of Software

Dig a little deeper, and Nokia’s problems with its smartphone OS strategy are evidently problems with software more generally. The company fundamentally didn’t get software, says Gleeson — so they didn’t understand the crucial significance of apps and building an ecosystem around apps. “Nokia has almost always produced high quality hardware; but it was its software that was the weakness,” he says. “Nokia vastly underestimated the importance of third-party applications to the smartphone proposition. Each Symbian UI required its own custom build of the OS which limited the addressable market of any third-party apps.”
I haven't a clue who Daniel Gleeson is or even what IHS Screen Digest is but it's clear this guy either doesn't know or doesn't understand what Qt/QML was for. Qt addressed all the things he claimed were issues and clearly demonstrated pre-Elop NOKIA absolutely did get the importance of the ecosystem. Whoever wrote this article really should have interviewed better informed 'analysts'.

The irony of this fool saying: "The company fundamentally didn’t get software" when it's so apparent he didn't understand the significance of Qt actually makes me feel slightly embarrassed for him
Honestly, what a numbnut!


But wait, the foolishness doesn't end there:
Originally Posted by Lumiaman View Post
“Furthermore, Nokia had a blasé attitude towards compatibility of apps; breaking backwards compatibility on OS upgrades on multiple occasions e.g. S60 third edition, Windows Phone 8; and developing phones incapable of using some games available for earlier devices (e.g. Nokia 500, Lumia 610),” he adds. “Consumers are attracted to smartphones for their ability to be more than just communication tools, and so the lack of apps hinders adoption. One can simply look at the lack of some key apps such as Spotify from Nokia’s latest flagship as a continuation of this problem (Spotify is available on the Lumia 800 and 900 however).
Qt was to address compatability problems, changing to Windows Phone exaberbated them (incidentally how many of the devices referred to in that quoted passage were pre-Elop?). How can you claim this as an argument for Elop when Windows Phone 8 isn't even compatible with Windows Phone 7 never mind NOKIA devices running other operating systems?

Qt was to be a common framework across MeeGo/Symbian/Meltemi. Now what do we have? WP8/WP7/Series40 - all incompatible with each other. This would be a disaster for NOKIA's ecosystem if they still had one but of course Elop gifted that to Microsoft.