Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
1. Good Deal. Nokia makes damn good phones and I actually like WP8, the problem however is not uniting hardware and software but apps.

If Microsoft cant get their depth of applications to where Android is at, and soon, this acquisition won't even matter. If I were to switch from IOS to Android today 95% of apps would be covered....with WP8 I'm looking at 30%. That's a non starter for a decent chunk of smartphone buyers.

2. If I were a betting man I'd say Elop is the next Microsoft CEO. This is a pretty huge deal to close, Microsoft has a CEO vacancy, and he is a former employee. Timing seems perfect.

3. I can easily see Microsoft taking the low end of the smartphone business if they can get their App Store up to par. The Nokia 521 at $80-$129 no contract is the best cheap smartphone you can buy. If Microsoft starts to target that portion of the market, they can easily take it, and build. Up the same sort of momentum Android did.
 
it's sad that a company that first begin selling smartphone less than 2 years ago is now more valuable than Nokia. Nokia was valued at $250 billion USD back in 2000.


http://techcrunch.com/2013/08/28/xiaomi-what-americans-need-to-know/

Xiaomi Tech was founded just three years ago, but it already has a valuation of $10 billion after completing its latest round of fundraising earlier this month. To put that into context, Xiaomi is now on par with Lenovo’s market value of $10 billion and almost twice BlackBerry’s current market valuation of $5.5 billion.

The company only started selling smartphones in October 2011, but it recently raised its sales target for 2013 to 20 million smartphones, up from its previous 15 million goal.

Xiaomi strategy: high specs smartphone at break-even prices

It doesn't make money from hardware but from services (apps, accessories etc...) emulating Amazon.

2012: 7 million smartphone sold
2013: forecasting 20 million smartphone...
2014: ?
 

Double yawn.

I'm too much of a cynic these days to see a major upside to this for MSFT. Feels a bit "too little, too late" to me.

----------

What crashing? My experience with Windows Phone 7.0/7.5/8.0 has been one of utter stability. Maybe 2 crashes in 18 months.

1. I've got a friend in the same boat. Says his Windows phone has crashed essentially 2-3 times in two years. We'll be kind and go with twice. That's four between you two. Average of two.

2. I've never had an iPhone crash since my first one, the 3GS, which I acquired during the week of it's launch.

3. Since crashing is buggy software, or an un-stable OS, I'd point out that I've never had an iPad crash either, which I've been on since launch of iPad 1 in 2010.
 
Real quick, as in 6 years of iPhone being in the market?

That's been Microsoft's problem since the early 90s, they're not nimble at all. Nothing moves fast... Decisions are agonizingly slow. The corporate culture sucks! They're a tortoise. And no, in real life, tortoises don't win. Only against other tortoises.
 
This transaction has nothing amazing. Microsoft and Nokia are working together for some years now and the Finnish firm has contributed greatly to the success of Windows Phone.



------------------------------------------------------
samsung galaxy note 3 iphone 5s
 
Last edited:
This is technically wrong. Apple bought Next which became the basis of OS X. The rest as they say is history.

But NeXT wasn't some large multi billion acquisition. An acquisition like that today, for a few hundred million, would barely make news.
 
Why am I not surprised by this?

I'm surprised anyone is surprised by this. Only thing I find head scratching is MS announcing a major reorg and buying Nokia while at the same time canning Ballmer. So basically in order for someone to get the new CEO job they need to be on board with the reorg and support the Nokia acquisition. That new CEO is basically hamstrung from the get go. Unless MS isn't really looking and Elop will be announced the new CEO. But then that begs the question why didn't they announce Ballmer's departure, Nokia acquisition (and Elop replacing Ballmer) and reorg all at once? The way they've handled things makes it look like they're desperate and they're scrambling.
 
And now Microsoft can integrate the next killer iFail

Frankly, if one were to wish for the death of Nokia, this is the closest thing to a guarantee you could get. Time after time, MS has iFailed on their attempts for the next iPod, iPhone, iPad killer.

Too bad they'll take an entire brand down with them this time.
 
Who actually thinks this is a good idea? A software company buys a hardware company and thinks they can make the switch? This has doom spelled all over it, this is a HUGE mistake I predict. Two companies falling out of the sky, neither have a parachute and one grabs the other, for what, something soft to land on?
 
WOW, I woke up to this.

Its HUGE, and Microsoft suddenly becomes a major player in the phone market. I'd say this is bigger then Google buying Motorola.

imo, its a great business decision for MS, but I wonder if there will be a lot of hard feelings for Elop, who was hired by Nokia from MS, and now basically sells the company to his former employer instead of trying to continue to grow the business.
 
Sure, there's some potential with the Microsoft-Nokia deal being the ticket to bring Microsoft some mobile mojo. But that's not the most important factor for success. All of this means squat if Microsoft cannot find a capable CEO to replace Ballmer.

In fact, the next CEO's job just got even more complex, more difficult, more demanding. He has some very big shoes to fill. The expectation will be extremely high for him to perform.

Here's the problem that Microsoft has: They don't need a CEO who is just capable. I'm sure Ballmer is capable, the problem is that the things he did so capably weren't actually any good for Microsoft. Finding someone who does the same things as Ballmer, but twice as capable, won't fix Microsoft's problems.

I think the biggest challenge is to change how people work together with other people. Jobs' principle was that "A players like to work with A players". In other words, people want to work with others who are as good or better than themselves. That gives the best results. At Microsoft, the way the company is organised, you really want to have co-workers who are no good, making you the best in the team and getting all the praise. If your boss hires someone who is good at his or her job, you do your best to knife them in the back to keep the competition at bay. Well, that does wonders for the productivity of your teams.

----------

But NeXT wasn't some large multi billion acquisition. An acquisition like that today, for a few hundred million, would barely make news.

I think about $400 million, which would be about 7% of what Microsoft pays for the Nokia bits. Maybe 3% of what Google paid for Motorola.
 
I'm surprised anyone is surprised by this. Only thing I find head scratching is MS announcing a major reorg and buying Nokia while at the same time canning Ballmer. So basically in order for someone to get the new CEO job they need to be on board with the reorg and support the Nokia acquisition. That new CEO is basically hamstrung from the get go. Unless MS isn't really looking and Elop will be announced the new CEO. But then that begs the question why didn't they announce Ballmer's departure, Nokia acquisition (and Elop replacing Ballmer) and reorg all at once? The way they've handled things makes it look like they're desperate and they're scrambling.

I thought that too - I'd bet Elop won't be replacing Ballmer (else they'd have announced it - this deal has been in the works for 6 - 12 months, so they've known about it for quite some time), but just what you say, the new CEO is going to have to implement someone else's strategy, good luck finding someone of worth to do that. Yet another head scratching move from MS.
 
It will never happen. Microsoft has a few cash cows that will generate revenue in the billions. Microsoft will always have money to burn and waste on failed initiatives for as many times as they want.

This is not necessarily a bad deal. MS has a lot of solid assets software wise - what they were missing was integration into the mobile market and services. Someone else mentioned the one weak link is increasing the depth and breadth of their app store. This acquisition can help that as there is now an integrated hardware base for developers. If MS can build out its map apps and integration along with music and photos and maybe even something like Google Plus - they will do well.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.