Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft Businesses Cellphones The Almighty Buck

Nokia Shareholders Approve Sale To Microsoft 182

Posted by timothy
from the never-got-fired-for-buying-microsoft dept.
mrspoonsi writes "Nokia shareholders met today at an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) to vote on whether or not to accept the terms of the company's proposed sale of its devices and services business to Microsoft. The deal, which was first announced in September, is worth €5.44bn EUR ($7.35bn USD / £4.57bn GBP), and also includes provisions for Microsoft to license patents from the Finnish company. 78% of those eligible to vote had already voted before the EGM. Of those early votes, a staggering 99% had voted in favour of the sale to Microsoft."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nokia Shareholders Approve Sale To Microsoft

Comments Filter:
  • by somersault (912633) on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @11:09AM (#45463385) Homepage Journal

    .. buys other increasingly irrelevant tech dinosaur for lots of money.

    News at 11

    • by DogDude (805747) on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @11:15AM (#45463453) Homepage
      Nothing says" irrelevant" like running on 95% of the world's computers!
      • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @11:31AM (#45463601)

        Slashdogma tenant 4: if the OS isn't Linux, it's irrelevant. (some consider OSX relevant because it has the same command line syntax)
        Tenant 5 is similar, that if you can't git something, it might as well not exist (yes, this does even mean svn is ignored)

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Desktops/laptops are not 100% of the world's computers!

        • by Eunuchswear (210685) on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @11:59AM (#45463889) Journal

          Fuck, these days they probably aren't even 50%

          250 million smartphones sold in Q3 2013.

          • by mirix (1649853)

            If you start counting embedded things as 'computers', traditional 'computers' must fall to a few percent.

            Think of it... at least one in each car, often several. Most every modern TV, router, etc.

            With narrower scope, most appliances really... though the microcontrollers are often doing pretty lame tasks that were previously done with (electro)mechanical trickery. The electronic replacement now has more efficiency and features, and (generally, but certainly not always - implementation is important!) is more r

            • If you start counting embedded things as 'computers', traditional 'computers' must fall to a few percent.

              The same thing was said when "microcomputers" started being called "computers" rather than real computers, ie "mainframes".

        • by exomondo (1725132)

          Desktops/laptops are not 100% of the world's computers!

          Until an anti-trust lawsuit comes along.

      • by somersault (912633) on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @11:36AM (#45463643) Homepage Journal

        Consider the things that most computer users do. Now consider the devices that they can do (and do do.. ho ho) these things on. Smartphones, tablets, consoles, internet enabled TVs, and everything else that you can now use for things like Facebook, Netflix, editing documents, etc. You have now noticed that their market relevance is nowhere near 95%. And it's falling.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          I consider it this way. My Smartphone has more power and RAM and runs more apps than my "High end" desktop PC from 13 years ago (Circa 2000), and in some ways has better features than the PC from 13 years ago. It isn't a "full desktop" so what, it is a computer!!

          • by Wootery (1087023)

            It isn't a "full desktop" so what, it is a computer!!

            Really? Ok:

            The form factor counts for a lot. Big numbers alone don't enable me to type up my dissertation: for that, I need a full-size keyboard and a full-size monitor. Your smart-phone provides neither.

            There's still a place for 'full desktops', and there will be for the foreseeable future.

            • The form factor counts for a lot. Big numbers alone don't enable me to type up my dissertation: for that, I need a full-size keyboard and a full-size monitor. Your smart-phone provides neither.

              In most cases, neither your full-size keyboard nor your full-size monitor run Windows.

              • by Wootery (1087023)

                Do you actually have a point, or are you just enjoying pedantry?

                In case the intent of my message somehow wasn't obvious to you: A full-size keyboard and full-size monitor are necessary, but not sufficient.

                • My point was that most people's phones are easily capable of running whatever software a person needs to type up a dissertation. Needing a keyboard and monitor is not sufficient to need Windows.
            • About a decade and a half ago, I thought of how the future of computing might be and I envisioned people walking around with portable computer storage pods (think hard drives in a case) that would be plugged into "computer shells" via special slots. This would turn the shell into the user's customized computer with all of their applications and preferences.

              Nowadays, we have smartphones and tablets that are just as portable as those "pods" I thought of so long ago and much more powerful. Add a bluetooth ke

              • Nowadays, we have smartphones and tablets that are just as portable as those "pods" I thought of so long ago and much more powerful. Add a bluetooth keyboard and mouse as well as a monitor (via a HDMI Out port) and you could turn your smartphone/tablet into a full fledged keyboard that would rival any desktop computer from 2000.

                So why don't people do that?

                I think a large part of it is software. Android was simply not designed as a desktop OS. It was designed for devices with small touchscreens and it shows both in the interface of the OS itself (no multiwindow for example) and in the design of applications untended to run on it. MS went to all the effort of porting windows to arm but then refused to let people actually run third party desktop apps on the thing*.

                The surface pro line has promise if MS can shed the stigma the surface

            • by jrumney (197329)

              I don't know about your smartphone, but mine comes with MHL and Bluetooth keyboard support (I was going to say USB-OTG, but I think if you're using the MHL port, you can't use USB at the same time since they share the same physical plug).

          • by lgw (121541)

            I have a smartphone, but it's an appliance, like my smart TV. I have a box with a keyboard, mouse and monitor at home that I use to write and run general purpose software, and it's not a smartphone. It also has a Hell of a lot more power than the appliances (imaging ripping and converting a bluray with a smartphone - it's possible, and I'm sure someone's done it, but someone was very patient).

          • My first android phone (G1 - 2008 ) had better specs than the beast of a computer I built in 1998) for 1/10th the price!

            1998 - Pentium II 300 PC w/ Hitachi 17" monitor $5500
            MIPS: 380
            Ram: 128 MB
            Storage: 6GB SCSI drive + 1GB Jaz drive
            Screen: 1600 x 1200 24 bit color
            Networking: Ethernet + 56k modem
            Other Accessories: Cheapo microphone
            Other Benefits: Upgradeable. Built in anti-theft (heavy as hell).

            2008 - G1 $480 + $20 (SD card)
            MIPS: 630
            RAM: 192 MB
            Storage: 192 MB + SD (8GB)
            Screen: 320 x 480 16 bit color (onl

        • by loufoque (1400831)

          Who sells them those consoles? Microsoft.
          Microsoft is still the reference for office stuff and games, and there is really no way around it.

          • Hahaha.. yeah they sell a console, sure.

            Microsoft is still one of the main office players yes. There have been ways around that for quite a while, and there continue to be more ways around it.

            The reference for games, though..? What are you smoking?

            • by loufoque (1400831)

              The xbox 360 was clearly the winner of the previous generation.
              The wii did get a lot of sales, but it was from casual people and not more regular and serious game consumers.

              • Clearly by what metric? The PS3 also outsold the 360 eventually. The Wii kicked both their asses in terms of pushing units. Xbox and PS3 are about the same in terms of games and all the "exclusive" BS.

                Don't all Xbox "exclusives" also come out for Windows after a while? It seems kind of redundant to have one IMO. Whereas some of my favourite games ever have been PC or PS3 only..

                After more than six years of playing catch up, lifetime PlayStation 3 sales have passed lifetime Xbox 360 sales to become the second bestselling home console for the seventh generation. According to VGChartz latest sales data the PlayStation 3 has sold 77,313,472 units to date, while the Xbox 360 has sold 77,311,669 units.

                The PlayStation 3 first launched on November 11, 2006, nearly one year after the Xbox 360, which launched on November 22, 2005.

                The gap was just over five million units when the PlayStation 3 launched, but it grew to more than eight million units as the PlayStation 3 struggled to take off when it first launched. However, after the first console redesign, price cuts and major software releases the PlayStation 3 started outselling the Xbox 360 on a weekly basis.

                In 2010, the PlayStation 3 managed to catch up by 600,000 units and in 2011 by nearly 900,000 units. In 2012, the PlayStation 3 sold 12.73 million units, while the Xbox 360 managed to sell 11.10 million units. In just the first five months of 2013 the PlayStation 3 has outsold the Xbox 360 by one million units.

                The Wii, the bestselling home console for the seventh generation, is 22.35 million units ahead of the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. However, the PlayStation 3 has caught up by 2.50 million units in just five months.

                http://www.vgchartz.com/article/250980/playstation-3-lifetime-sales-overtakes-the-xbox-360/ [vgchartz.com]

                • by loufoque (1400831)

                  PC-like games go to xbox 360. PS3 has mostly japanese console-only games, which are not a replacement for a PC.

                  • They're not a replacement exactly, but it does make the 360 irrelevant IMO. I had all 3 consoles plus a decent PC in the last generation, and my 360 got the least use.

                    I know that's anecdotal evidence, but I realised after a short while that a Microsoft console was completely redundant. The only reason to have an Xbox is if you can't wait for the games to come out on PC. Gears of War, Halo, Fable etc have come out for PC. Forza hasn't, but I tried it and wasn't exactly smitten (I love driving).

                    The PS3 doesn'

                    • by loufoque (1400831)

                      I have the 3 consoles and a high-end PC. My PC is mostly for working (and runs Linux most of the time anyway), and most of my gaming is on the xbox 360.
                      The japanese do not release their games on PC, only on consoles (except for doujinshi games, eroge or other indies). And very few of their games make it to the xbox. They're the reason why I bought a PS3 in the first place.

                      As you can see, your anecdotal evidence is not verified by me.

              • by whoever57 (658626)

                The wii did get a lot of sales, but it was from casual people and not more regular and serious game consumers.

                No true scotsman ......

                • by loufoque (1400831)

                  Revenue is made on the sales of games, not consoles.
                  A casual gamer doesn't play much, so he won't buy many games either. That means less revenue per gamer.

        • by Ravaldy (2621787)

          I would never write a document or manage an excel file on a mobile device (not included laptops). It's inefficient to say the least. I'd also love to see one do his taxes on a Galaxy S3 or Iphone 5. Even banking is still limited on mobile devices due to the companies not being completely cough up with all the feature that are available via a standard browser. CURRENT mobile devices aren't input friendly and that is one major reason they aren't crushing the PC market. And not sure who came up with the 95% fi

      • by Sockatume (732728)

        Unfortunately for Microsoft, those kinds of computers aren't a growth industry any more. The tide's going out.

      • "Computers" (Score:5, Informative)

        by DrYak (748999) on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @12:36PM (#45464289) Homepage

        Nothing says" irrelevant" like running on 95% of the world's computers!

        ...for a very specific subset of "computers":
        i.e.: big desktop machines, in homes and offices.

        Absolutely every other device with similar computing specs that is interracted directly with, or that is relied behind-the-scene on, runs something else.
        (Tablets, Smartphones, home wifi router/modem, home micro-NAS for backups, the set-top box or media under the TV and/or the TV itself, the infotainment system in the Car: i.e. everything at home beside the laptop [the single device running Windows] and the Microwave Oven [still powered by a micro-controller, not enough power for a full-blown OS])
        mostly shared between Linux (either GNU or Android), *BSD, and specialised OSes like QNX.

        (and at work, as long as it's not a SOHO who is dependant on Microsoft Directory Service and Sharepoint, you can bet that pretty much everything behind the scene run some flavour of Unix)

        In short, the "year of Linux on everything except the desktop" has come since long time.

      • For a definition of "computer" that hasn't been relevant for five or six years now.

      • They dont even have 95% of DESKTOP computers anymore let alone anywhere near that number for total computers. Every Android/iOS device is another computer against MS's count. MS is shrinking and in doing so their relative power shrinks exponentially. MS's only strength is their monopoly and its dying.
    • by riis138 (3020505)
      Say what you will about Nokia but as someone who has owned Apple and Samsung devices previously, I have to say my Lumia is the best phone I have ever owned.
      • by somersault (912633) on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @11:55AM (#45463841) Homepage Journal

        Anyone who has been paying attention knows that Nokia has been "owned" by MS for a while now though, so this news really just isn't surprising in any way. And it doesn't seem like it will benefit anyone other than Nokia shareholders looking to cash out.

        • Cue conspiracy theories about how Microsoft persuaded Nokia to go all in on Windows phones, knowing full well it would flop and cause the company to stumble hard enough to enable a cheap buyout.

          • I don't think they knew it would fumble. I'm sure they honestly hoped that having Nokia (a well respected hardware manufacturer at the time) produce the latest Windows phone would make them catch on. Having the stock tank and be an easy buy-out was just Plan B.
      • Great, too bad its ecosystem is dead. There is simply no apps. I went on the windows store on my 8.1 tablet. No Pandora, no banking app, no anything pretty much. I think the nokia phones are nice, but they are hamstrung by their shitty ecosystem.
        • by cbhacking (979169)

          Windows Store != Windows Phone Store. Windows Store is less likely to contain things like banking apps or Pandora, because with a full desktop browser (including Flash) in every machine capable of using the Windows Store, there's a lot less need for it.

          Windows Phone's store has Pandora (and a ton of other music services), apps for nearly all significant banks by now (although it took them a while; six months ago there were some very notable omissions), and tons of other such stuff. It's not up to Google Pla

          • I thought they were one and the same. What the fuck is the point of Modern UI then? Why would they be different? Holy shit MS marketing is the worst.
    • by hairyfeet (841228)

      What we need is a "sad but true" mod as that has been the MO of Ballmer's tenure at MSFT, buy up companies that are either has beens or just starting out and proceed to completely cock them up and ruin anything that may have been good about them by trying to shape them into a half baked ripoff of whatever was hip. See Kin, Zune, Sidekick, that ad company they bought trying to ape Google, I swear the shareholders would see a better ROI if they replaced Ballmer with a monkey throwing poo at a copy of the bus

      • by lgw (121541)

        buy up companies that are either has beens or just starting out and proceed to completely cock them up and ruin anything that may have been good about them by trying to shape them into a half baked ripoff of whatever was hip

        There's nothing unique to MS about that. That's just how large tech companies work - you see the same from Yahoo, Google, Cisco, Symantec, EA, etc. And the simple fact is most new products fail, you just hear about them more when they fail after a large company buys them.

        As far as messing with Windows, I'm hanging on to my keys for Win7 forever, but at least there's a big shakeup at MS and who knows, maybe they'll "get it". They came back from Vista, after all.

    • They can name the union of dying companies Necrosoft.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @11:10AM (#45463399)

    Elop has succeeded in destroying Nokia. Hopefully, it will take Microsoft with it!

    • by hydrofix (1253498) on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @11:37AM (#45463673)
      Elop is a likely candidate for the next CEO at Redmond. When you are thinking about Microsoft and Nokia, you must always think in opposites, like in Lewis Carroll's book Through The Looking Glass, to grasp how these companies' management teams operate. So, as in our mere mortals' terms Elop is a miserable executive, who did almost everything in his power to destroy his company's market position, in Redmond-speak it means he is a great manager. Further in their distorted reality field, he is a great choice for the next CEO, because selecting the worst outcome for Microsoft is the management's objective. So, you just might be right about Elop's next job!
  • Their only chance (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sunderland56 (621843) on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @11:13AM (#45463425)

    The two choices:

    A) sell out to Microsoft and get some cash for the shareholders;

    B) go bankrupt and lose everything.

    Yeah, I'd choose A too. Interesting that Blackberry, in pretty much the same position, chose B.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Kjella (173770)

      I think Nokia is barely breaking even in a booming market, they're not quite ready for bankruptcy court even if they're becoming a more and more marginal player. But at this point, yeah I'd vote for Microsoft because what alternative is there at this point? None at all.

    • by Xest (935314) on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @11:56AM (#45463859)

      Blackberry isn't bankrupt, they still have some useful stuff, they just need to utilise it properly.

      If they do go bankrupt it'll be because of management failing to realise their potential, not because they had nothing of value left.

      For example, there'd still be massive scope for Blackberry to start releasing Android devices that were secured to a similar standard to their existing phones and to integrate their business tools into it like BIS.

      Right now whilst business integration tools have improved for the major smartphone platforms iOS, Android and Windows Phone are still primarily consumer focussed operating systems.

      So there'd be a pretty large market for someone with the past experience of Blackberry at satisfying corporate customers to create a purely corporate focussed line of smartphones that are based on iOS, Windows Phone or Android - I suspect Android would be the best bet as it's the easiest option for a third party to customise to the degree needed.

      A range of Android handsets with a determined focus on security, business needs, and easy integration to corporate systems would basically hand them the entire business world and they have much of the groundwork in place that they need to do that. They just need management capable of realising it. A good CEO could have this up and running within a year, anything else and then they'll be bankrupt.

      • by cusco (717999)

        there'd still be massive scope for Blackberry to start releasing Android devices that were secured

        You could have stopped there, the gaping security holes in pretty much all of the Android installations on the market, and the even worse ones introduced by manufacturers' preinstalled crapware, need to be dealt with adequately before I'll consider doing anything like online banking on them.

        • " before I'll consider doing anything like online banking on them." Security is not really an issue here. Everything is insured and protected from fraud. Banking relies on trust WAY more than it does technology.
      • by TheSpoom (715771)

        I wouldn't be surprised if they're already doing this. An Android fork does take time, though.

      • by dwpro (520418)

        While I believe you had an insightful comment, your spelling errors were making me wince so I had to stop reading. Please get a spellchecker, they're so very useful.

  • Not so staggering. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by intermodal (534361) on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @11:19AM (#45463479) Homepage Journal

    I understand the journalistic desire to phrase things dramatically, but there is nothing staggering about a struggling company accepting a buyout from a company with a perceived strong market position.

    • by gstoddart (321705) on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @11:56AM (#45463851) Homepage

      but there is nothing staggering about a struggling company accepting a buyout from a company with a perceived strong market position.

      No, but there's something fishy when a former Microsoft exec came in, gutted the company, made them entirely beholden to Microsoft, and then watched their market share collapse.

      You couldn't construct a better tin-foil hat scenario than a corporate executive making the company ripe to be bought by his former employer.

      To me, either Nokia was incompetently managed, leading to the eventual purchase by Microsoft -- or this was all part of someone's master plan to make this happen.

      And if that person who either incompetently managed Nokia (or masterminded their demise) is a candidate to become the CEO of Microsoft ... you have to ask why someone who is either incompetent or dishonest is being considered.

      CEOs and executives don't seem to get selected for actually being able to do something, but who they know that can make back room deals. To me, Elop was an abysmal failure at the helm of Nokia, so WTF qualifies him to be at the helm of another?

      • by cusco (717999)

        Nokia was already in decline before Elop came on board, and the decision to abandon Symbian had already been made. His choices were 1) join the stampede towards Android and attempt to compete with established monsters Samsung and LG, 2) resurrect Symbian, or 3) chose a new phone OS. What would your choice have been?

        • by gstoddart (321705)

          What would your choice have been?

          What would yours have been? What would Kim Kardashian's have been? What would your mom do? What would Any Kaufman have done?

          See, I'll say right up front -- I'm not qualified to be the CEO of a multi-billion dollar company. I can't speak for you, but I'll go out on a limb and say none of Kim Kardashian, your mom, nor Andy Kaufman would have been put in this role. So what we would have done is irrelevant.

          Is Elop prepared to say that he's not qualified either? Because oth

        • resurrect Symbian

          Don't say another goddamn word. [penny-arcade.com]

          When Elop came on board, Symbian was still the #1 smartphone OS, with a 44% market share. There were challengers appearing, but with proper support, it would have remained a viable contender until they had MeeGo ready, and this one would fare much better than Windows Phone ever will.

          • by cusco (717999)

            From an executive point of view MeeGo was an unknown with almost no apps and almost no community developing to write those apps. MS had had successful phone OSs in the past (remember that Windows Embedded ran the first real smart phones), there was a full stable of applications already available and an enormous community of people already accustomed to writing Windows applications.

            Was it the right choice? We'll never know, Ballmer played out his typical scenario of making it too expensive and too late t

            • MeeGo was an unknown with almost no apps and almost no community

              But it had many carriers happy to support it. Unlike Windows Phone.

              remember that Windows Embedded ran the first real smart phones

              No, that'd be the Nokia 9000 Communicator, which ran GEOS.

              there was a full stable of applications already available

              That was true of Windows Mobile, which Microsoft abandoned in favor of the fully incompatible Windows Phone.

              I just looked at the project's home page and it hasn't been updated since 2011

              You don't say, Captain Obvious? Elop killed the damn thing! But, being open-source, MeeGo left an heir: Mer [merproject.org], the basis of Sailfish [sailfishos.org], which runs on the Jolla [jolla.com] - made by a crew of former Nokia engineers.

              and Tizen's major selling point seems to be that it supports HTML5.

              Its major selling point, to manufacturers and carriers, is that it's not under t

    • by Xest (935314) on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @12:11PM (#45464021)

      The staggering newsworthy thing in this case is that it was the company with a perceived strong market position that engineered the other company into a struggling position in the first place.

      Or in other words, this was one of the most blatant planned corporate sabotages and subsequent buyouts of recent history.

      Elop has abysmally failed as a CEO and yet Microsoft are treating him like a hero, even with suggestions he's the frontrunner to run Microsoft itself now. Normally in an acquisition like this he'd be first out the door for creating arguably one of the biggest corporate failures in history (the speed at which Nokia lost assets and fell into a loss making company was staggering). The rest of his family never even left America which strongly implies they knew he was coming back. If that doesn't make it clear that what many people suspect went on isn't just theory then I don't know what would.

      So the news is that what many people theorised was the plan all along actually was. Maybe given that many of us theorised it from the outset means we shouldn't be surprised, but I think the shock that we were right, that Microsoft would be so blatant and open about the game they were playing and so utterly lacking in subtlety is shocking. Most of us are in disbelief that we were right, that the biggest and most succesful phone manufacturer on the planet and that had a strong anti-Microsoft culture could be turned round into a Microsoft takeover victim in just a few short years.

      • by number17 (952777)
        The owners didn't seem to mind otherwise they would have done something about it.
      • by lgw (121541)

        Shareholders fire CEOs more often than you might think. Clearly your ideas about what happened aren't shared by those with an actual financial stake in it all - it's not like the board couldn't see Windows Phone coming when they hired the guy! Nokia was in collapse. Would being the 3rd major Android player been a better choice? Maybe, but going a different direction to try to stand out in a crowded market was more in tune with Nokia's past IMO.

    • If this is all you can say on this subject then perhaps you should be silent in deference to the people who actually know this is the culmination of a long term plan. We are now discussing that long term plan.
  • by HerculesMO (693085)

    That people reference Nokia as a failure due to Elop, as if it was doing so well in the smartphone arena before he took over? Have a sense of reality folks. Nokia was dying fast, and while the MS integration may or not have been a great idea, something had to be done. I will let history judge the actions, but in many parts of Europe, Nokia is overtaking the iPhone in sales... so there is that.

    • by ruir (2709173)
      I am European and I would not use an Nokia even if I were paid for that. Back in here I am seeing people with buying power buying iPhones, and people with budget limits (teens) almost exclusively in Android. Would you care to elaborate the "many parts of Europe"?
      • UK != European, which is where I suspect you are from. In Germany I see them now all the time. In Spain I have the impression that coloured plastic is everywhere and it's NOT iPhone 5cs. I've not visited Italy recently but I hear it's doing even better there. don't take my word for it [wpcentral.com]
        • by ruir (2709173)
          I am actually from Portugal. In the rare occasions I travel by train, and at university, I have seen teens with maybe > 90% Android. The odds ones have 2nd-hand iPhones, and we seen a lot of people with Iphone 4/4S due to people really wanting an iphone, but not willing to pay its hefty tag, and asinine operator contracts. People affluent are either with high end Androids or most of the time iPhones. If I discount the Microsoft salespeople we see often, I can go for days, maybe weeks without a Windows ph
  • by symbolset (646467) * on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @12:31PM (#45464227) Journal
    Exit, stage right.
  • So Snapchat is worth about 40% of Nokia. Interesting.
  • Steven Elop works for microsoft. Steven Elop goes to Nokia. Steven Elop restructures and retools Nokia to be a Microsoft shop. Steven Elop cuts Nokia's market cap in half. Microsoft buys Nokia. Steven Elop becomes CEO of Microsoft in a few years (after Ballmer's successor resigns after 2 years). You guys connect the dots yet? I'm sure Nokia has a lot of patents Microsoft wants.
    • It may well have been an orchestrated plan by MS from the start, but Nokia was worthless the day the iPhone was released. That was a long long time before Elop took over. All he did was bulldoze the collapsing tenemant and start a new building form a clean foundation.
  • It's not worth much anymore.

  • by EmperorOfCanada (1332175) on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @01:52PM (#45465207)
    The horrible thing is that they could have had a great marketing advantage by being able to say, "Our phones' OS, design, legal control, and manufacturing all take place in a country that will take your security seriously. We do not answer to the whims of US officials and will, in fact, be abusive to their requests."

    This would have garnered them a nice chunk of the market.

    That is gone now.
  • Nokia has been assimilated by Microsoft. ...why did /. change its icon for MS again? The old one is so appropriate! Who wants to photoshop Elop into it?

    http://kaioa.com/b/1102/svgjng/images/microsoft_64.png [kaioa.com]

  • Nokia are making phones that are winning awards [laptopmag.com] and market share [wpcentral.com] and their share price is rocketing [v3.co.uk]

    I had an N95, it was great for its time but became an anachronism the day the iPhone was released. Today you can buy Nokia phones that do more than iPhone for less money. Really, /. Nobody likes Microsoft but it's time to accept that Winphone is a good product, that people like it, and that it is going to seriously challenge Apple and Google.

"In order to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe." -- Carl Sagan, Cosmos

Working...