[jad]

> Elop needs to go now. What an ass clown. It's been a while since we've seen someone with such bad ideas making such horrible decisions, one after another. He reaped what he sowed, and the board can thank him for decimating a once fantastic phone company.

Shipping phones running Android is far from a guarantee of success. Indeed, only Samsung is doing well with Android right now, and even then only in the last year or so. Every single other Android handset maker is struggling. Android turns your hardware into a commodity, just as Windows turned PC hardware into a commodity. It's very hard to overcome this simple fact, even if you do make great hardware (see the HTC One). Don't take my word for it, ask HTC, ask LG, ask Motorola/Google, and so on.

Elop surely doesn't deserve to be dismissed as an "ass clown" for adopting what almost every critic agrees is a first rate phone OS. If Windows Phone had just a tiny bit of momentum, partnering with Microsoft would be a great strategy for establishing differentiation from Apple and the various Android phones.

[leoc]

Agreed that Android is not an easy gig for mobile-phone manufacturers; it isn't intended to be, after all. But if you look at why Samsung has done well with Android, the reasons appear to be 1) a fairly consistent record of delivering strong hardware, in good time 2) decent public brand recognition and loyalty and 3) not screwing around too badly with the Android software. All of the Android also-rans seem to have had significant problems with at least two of those. Nokia has 1) and 2) pretty much nailed, so if it could only restrain itself on 3) it would be in a position to contest the top of the Android pile with Samsung.

There's also Nokia's strength in featurephones and in the developing world; to maintain that position it will need a smartphone OS it can take to the real masses in the fairly near future. No-one is even suggesting that WinPho can play that role. Android may or may not be the best candidate for the role, but if OP is correct then Nokia's MS relationship hasn't just precluded it from putting Android on entry-level smartphones, it has prevented Nokia from deploying any other smartphone OS at all.

[vetinari]

Some android vendors are struggling, because they fucked it up, plain and simple.

Who would buy LG, once they had one in past? Nobody, exactly, chalk it up to bad experience.

Who would buy HTC, if they had Thunderbolt in the past? Or how they didn't support their other models? Who would take risk with the HTC One? That would do only those, who weren't burned by HTC in the past.

See the trend?

Samsung, on the other hand, is successful, because their products are actually good. Someone who had SGS2 in the past has no reason to avoid Samsung in the future.