6 ms·
Not surprising at all. Nokia should have move to Android 5 years ago when Samsung did.
by F1reman 13y ago
Not surprising at all.
Nokia should have move to Android 5 years ago when Samsung did.
- chiph 13y agoBut moving to Android means they're running a commodity OS, and they're competing against all the low-price phones from China. That would kill the company. They needed to offer a premium phone with an OS that is just compatible enough with desktops to work. I've had a Lumia 928 for several months now (after 3 iPhones in a row), and my concern is that Microsoft isn't releasing OS updates fast enough. I get updates from Nokia for their HERE apps, but the core OS needs some fixes (single volume control, compilation albums being split up in the music app), and I'm not seeing them.
- rthomas6 13y agoWhat about Samsung and HTC? They have high-end successful Android phones. Though I haven't looked at the financials of the company or anything... are they not doing well?
- pmelendez 13y agoI don't think HTC is doing very well so it would be just Samsung and they are competing for the premium segment so the cheap Chinese phone are not really a concern for them, but Nokia needed something else to differentiate, hence their choice for WP.
- FigBug 13y agoSamsung takes 95% of Android profits. HTC, Motorla, LG, Sony etc get to fight for the rest. I wonder how long Google is willing to be Samsung's R&D department for free.
- rthomas6 13y agoWow, that's unfortunate. Those other companies have phones that are just as nice as the Galaxy line, in my opinion. Especially HTC with the One.
- danieldk 13y agoGood luck! The volume control issue has been there for years now. I don't see them fixing it anytime soon.
- Zigurd 13y agoNokia's own smartphone OSs were selling better than Windows Phone when they were killed off. You can get an idea of this alternate reality with Jolla, which uses HERE and other Nokia ecosystem components.