It isn't. Call me naive or in denial, but I’m not prepared to accept a “new normal,” where there exist only two big design sockets–Samsung’s and Apple’s–for the smartphone market.
It’s just too painful to watch these two handset giants–through their dominance in the only market with meaningful growth for semiconductors–shut out practically every chip company who designs modems and apps processors, except for Qualcomm and Samsung.
I suspect I’m not alone in this feeling.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not here calling for a Nokia bailout. Nokia’s where it is today through Nokia’s own doing.
Looking back, Nokia’s management screwed up royally on three fronts: 1) clinging to Symbian for too long; 2) losing the battle in China; and 3) not choosing Android as an operating system for the company's smartphones.
Many pundits pin Nokia’s failure on the company having been too slow to accept the emergence of smartphones. They believe Nokia’s lack of presence in smartphones has triggered its downfall.
Nokia’s grip on the feature phone market had begun sliding way before smartphones became mainstream. While spending a lot of engineering resources perfecting a variety of feature phones for the global market, Nokia unfortunately missed the cues for two key opportunities.
One was the advent of the dual SIM mobile phone, designed to hold two SIM cards. It took Nokia almost a decade before fully embracing this trend. Dual-SIM operation essentially enables mobile phone users to use two services without carrying two phones. Using multiple SIM cards allows a user to take advantage of different pricing plans for calls and text messages to certain destinations, as well as mobile data usage.
Nokia’s close relationship with mobile carriers, however, blurred Nokia’s vision. It stayed off the dual SIM bandwagon out of misplaced loyalty to large operators, who preferred customers to use one network exclusively.
“Symbian in China” was another missed opportunity for Nokia. Before Android took the world by storm, there was reportedly a groundswell of demand for Symbian-based phones among handset vendors in China. But the decision by Symbian (and by Nokia) to make Symbian an open source operating system was too little, too late.
By the time Chinese OEMs could have embraced Symbian, there wasn’t enough engineering talent left at Symbian to make serious inroads into the China’s smartphone ecosystem. Meanwhile, what’s left of Symbian was later acquired by Accenture.
Then, Nokia made the unpopular decision of going with Microsoft for its smartphone strategy.
Nokia’s sin, however, wasn’t in partnering with Microsoft. Rather, it was its stubbornness in not acknowledging the rising tide of Android.
Although industry observers understood Microsoft’s powerful influence on Nokia (Stephen Elop who replaced Nokia’s previous CEO, Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo, in 2010 came from Microsoft), they could not comprehend how Nokia could possibly ignore Android. It seemed almost a willful act by Nokia’s management to miss Android’s unmistakable momentum so completely.
One engineering executive working for a leading mobile chip company said, "I just don’t understand why Nokia couldn’t develop Android phones--even in parallel with Microsoft’s Windows phones."
I just acquired a $100 Android 4.0 (Samsung Galaxy) phone from VirginMobile ($35/month pay as you go) and they had the cheapest Android phone (without plan!) for sale for $20. So, I think "feature phones" are a thing of the past, thanks to Moore's law. Also, my phone is fully integrated into the Google ecosystem which Nokia can't match and whose importance they probably underestimate. I also believe that content consumer tablets and workstations need different operating systems (e.g. Android vs. Ubuntu) due to different optimizations required, so Windows 8 for large volume (i.e. cheap) tablets is also troubled.
I think, the Windows 8 (WinNT 6.2) ecosystem inluding cell phones will get a significant share of the professional market long term.
The question is: has Nokia enough fat to burn not to starve on that long way.
At the moment it is the only commercially supported OS, which scales from cell phone to servers. As a result a single tool chain supports cell phones as well as servers. Code can be reused. Existing programs, developed with desktops in mind, "only" need an adapted UI and can be used on cell phones. New programs can offer an scalable, adaptive GUI to support cell phones, tablets and desktops. I think this will pay out long term.
why would you want to save them, after all the Cortex line has been around for a while now, and yet Nokia always under performs on their phones spec's all the time, cable STB style, i dont want under performing SOC i want more cores inside for when I want to do stuff , thats why im looking at the newest and cheap hardkernel refreshes ;)
all i need is a small case to put a cluster of these 48x52mm ULTRA COMPACT 1.7GHz QUAD-CORE BOARD, 2GByte Memory and 8Gbyte eMMC Version 4.41 add-on [url=http://www.hardkernel.com/renewal_2011/main.php]http://www.hardkernel.com/renewal_2011/main.php[/url] in there and a power harness to power them all, and don't even need the fan's taking space and needless power and the noise as such, well perhaps use a single one if i overclock them all OC to be safe when Software decoding full HD video such as that last hard sample.
ODROID-U2 XBMC 12.0 Demo at 1080p via HDMI
theres always MediaTek's new cortex Octo core to look at and consider when it arrives too.
who need Nokia today, their house might be nice though
Nokia is a great company, they only want to be No.1.In current situation, all of you guys, do you think Nokia will be back to be Market Leader if they use Android?! Just to be follower you hope to be No.1? I am not sure, Samsung has already too far with Android, Nokia will slightly better if they use Android now but too far from the TOP.They choose Windows and some improvements for their product to give different alternative for market,excellent product with excellent OS. I am sure they have chance return to the top,begin with Lumia 920 and 820
Nokia sold its soul to Microsoft. The only thing that can save Nokia is for Microsoft to buy the company outright. Unfortunately, such a move probably would mean that all Series 40 phone development would die.
Nokia must rethink back their phone strategy. They should choose either to stay focus on all type of mobile phone or just build up their line of smartphone and left out their feature phone. They can copy the likes of sony mobile to focusing on low end smartphone to high end smartphone
Nokia, whew, what a darn waste of engineering competitiveness and money. They, like you say literally looked the other way when Android crept up from behind them. Instead of rectifying the gap, they thought smartphones was just a temporary gimmick which the world would quickly shake away to fall back on feature rich, solid hardware and simply good phones primarily. For good or worse we have moved far from having a phone in our pocket though we still find that use from time to time.
Now, Nokia with android- I guess would not make much of a dent to either parties.
Thats right, had Nokia made Android phones, it would have given serious competition to Samsung. Nokia loyalists moved away from it just because of the software. Nokia makes the best hardware, but Windows is where it fails miserably.
David Patterson, known for his pioneering research that led to RAID, clusters and more, is part of a team at UC Berkeley that recently made its RISC-V processor architecture an open source hardware offering. We talk with Patterson and one of his colleagues behind the effort about the opportunities they see, what new kinds of designs they hope to enable and what it means for today’s commercial processor giants such as Intel, ARM and Imagination Technologies.