|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 03:34 PM EDT |
The answer to all your questions is "yes", they would be better off.
Nokia's crash did not happen until well after Elop took charge.
See this guy: http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/
Elop made a strong and bold move. He confidently turned toward a large and
successful company in their supply chain and wrangled a contract with favorable
terms, likely in exchange for making the OS company the sole supplier.
It is just a crying shame for Nokia that MS does not have the capability to
support the hardware or style of high end phones. Nokia has burned their
bridges and have nothing to fall back on. I suspect that Microsoft put some
goodies in the contract that forbid using any other OS in the product mix where
MS has something to offer. That is what "sole supplier" means. Many
companies have that. Usually it works out better than this.
Elop blew it. Big time. Microsoft was not ready. Just goes to show how even high
level executives of a company (Elop back in Microsoft) can be in the dark about
what really goes on. He did what a typical ignorant man in the street would do,
go with a known powerhouse. What can go wrong? Should he have known better? I
think so, but I am biased.
--
Bondfire
Studebaker made a bold move like this, burning their old designs and history in
a bid to win the future. Didn't help them either.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jjs on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 05:42 PM EDT |
And they pay to boot. At least with Android you can
customize and not pay.
---
(Note IANAL, I don't play one on TV, etc, consult a practicing attorney, etc,
etc)
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|