10-11-2012, 01:29 PM #1
- 91 Posts
I don't think there are many WP users who truly HATE Nokia as an OEM. In fact, I would guess that many people have a great deal of fondness for the company. If you got your first mobile phone in the late 90’s, it was probably made by Nokia.
Whether you like Nokia and believe that the 920 is the flagship WP phone or not – the fact is, Nokia has to succeed for Windows Phone to succeed. Success in the marketplace relies on consumers ‘voting’ with their wallets. I realize that this is nothing new, but when a certain population is not given an opportunity to ‘vote’ and decides to sit this one out or settle for second best or leave the ecosystem altogether, that’s frustrating.
The fact that we are members of the WPCentral forum says a lot about our passion for Windows Phone. No one can argue that Nokia has made some decisions recently that are frustrating, to say the least. When passionate people get frustrated, they act out – not because they hate, but because they want that thing that they are so passionate about to succeed. A little anger – sometimes aimed in the wrong place – feels good and somehow it feels like can make a difference, if nothing more than getting people to talk about it. It’s our own little ‘Nokia Autumn’.
The worst thing that COULD happen would be that no one really cares WHAT happens.
I don’t know. I just wanted to put that out there...
*steps off soapbox*
Last edited by steve_w_7; 10-11-2012 at 01:40 PM.
10-11-2012, 01:50 PM #7
- 91 Posts
10-11-2012, 02:21 PM #10
- 121 Posts
10-11-2012, 02:28 PM #11
- 51 Posts
Think Nokia failure = Windows Mobile failure is over stating it. Is an important player but there’s Samsung, and HTC, MS declared platform flagship phone? The exclusive deal is a money thing, is it mistake, yes, but remains to be seen how big of one.
Also been seeing lot of indicators that Verizon will eventually get a 920 variant. So if you don’t have to have one at WM8 release just wait a bit and you’ll probably get a Verizon version. From what you can read it too seems, unlike Sprint, that Verizon’s attitude toward the platform has changed.
- 10-11-2012, 02:57 PM #14
T-Mobile would happily sell the 920 or a variant, but as I was informed by one poster, T-Mobile doesn't deserve it because its future is in doubt (while Nokia's, presumably, is rock solid and guaranteed). :P
Rule #1 of business: make it easy for the customer to do business with you.
I'd love to consider a top-end Nokia device, but they simply won't offer them on my carrier. It's very frustrating!
10-11-2012, 05:09 PM #15
- 1,124 Posts
10-11-2012, 05:48 PM #16
- 3,488 Posts
Carriers have made it clear that they are not willing to do anything for Nokia if they aren't exclusive.
What Nokia found is that AT&T and T-Mobile made a real effort to market the Lumia phones. They actually tried to get their salespeople to try and push the phone. And when all is said and done, having the salesperson recommend a device is a HUGE thing.
In Europe, where there wasn't exclusivity, carriers weren't doing anything for Nokia.
- 10-11-2012, 06:39 PM #17
T-Mobile will still exist 24 months from now, and will be financially stronger than it is today. The same cannot be definitively said for Nokia.
The arrogance of Nokia (with itself is fourth ranked in smartphones globally, and not even a top 10 player in the USA, incidentally) and its culture is a major reason why it's in such a crisis. This is a do-or-die six months for them, and the last thing that will help them is trash-talking a carrier who has always treated them fairly and distributed Nokia devices even when every other US carrier had already booted Nokia completely out of their lineup.
- 10-12-2012, 01:47 PM #19
T-Mobile, in particular, would be happy to push Windows Phones of all sorts as an alternative, regardless of "exclusivity." It is differentiating on 4G network speeds, unlimited data, and value.
10-13-2012, 03:34 AM #21
- 1,754 Posts
Felt this would be appropriate in this topic as well, since some of these "frustrated concerned" members have predicted their analysis for Nokia as a "fail" also:
Did the Droid Razr prove to be a "fail" for being on Verizon only?
The original Note?
The EVO 4G?
The Samsung Moment on Sprint?
The MyTouch phones (in the beginning) for T-Mo?
****, the original Razr that was on AT&T at first?
The LG Chocolate line on Verizon?
The Hero on Sprint that was different than the GSM version?
The Blackberry Torch on AT&T? The Storm on Verizon (granted it suck but there was buzz)?
All of these phones, did pretty damn well and created a lot of buzz regardless of being on one carrier. And outside of the storm, they were all well received. I NEVER saw any talks of how the company is going to FAIL simply of providing a carrier exclusive. Oh, flipping, well. It's been like this for decades. I've been with every major carrier except for Verizon, and while being on those, I've had a lot of phone envy seeing phones come out to certain carriers, but I've never had a reaction like people are having. It's beyond ridiculous. And IMO, it's really a joke for some members to pretend that their blatant tantrums are constructive criticisms that comes from a general concern for the OEM. Please. You are upset because YOU can't get the 920, and that's okay. I've been disappointed to not be able to handle A LOT of phones in my lifetime, but it's NOT this big of a deal.Nokia Lumia 520 owner here...
10-13-2012, 06:19 AM #22
- 1,329 Posts
Even Samsung had to create carrier "exclusives" with the Galaxy S2, and that's after worldwide success of the predecessor and the S2 itself.
10-13-2012, 07:54 AM #23
- 163 Posts
Personally I'm on WP because of Nokia. Because they make the best phones and the quality of their commitment, innovations and hardware can make any OS usable (even Symbian that was a ****... I've been using it for 2 years on my N8 because up until recently no other phone could take photos nearly as good. My friends are still impressed by their quality after 2 years!). So if Nokia's WP strategy doesn't work and a new one has to be made I'll probably move with them too.
- 10-13-2012, 12:13 PM #24
cckgz4, the Droid RAZR was indeed a failure, as Motorola is still missing its sales predictions and is deep in the red. They recently announced that they're laying off about half of their staff. Doesn't seem like a "success" to me.
The other examples are all either failures or examples from 5+ years ago.
The Sprint Hero and BB Torch were both sales bombs.
Talking about the Original iPhone, the LG Chocolate (not even a smartphone), the original Moto RAZR (not even a smartphone) or the Sprint Exclusive Treos in 2003 is about as relevant as discussing the Atari 1040ST or the Macintosh SE. They're not even in the modern technology context.
Next, you're going to start citing VoiceStream and Comcast Metrophone press releases as evidence that the failed carrier-exclusive business model for smartphones in the modern era "can succeed." :D
- 10-13-2012, 12:17 PM #25
Do I want to be the flagship phone of a smaller carrier who will promote my phone as the best on its network, suggesting that people buy my Lumia 920 instead of an iPhone from the big guys, resulting in millions of sales and major publicity for my new flagship phone?
Do I want to sell my phone through the #4 carrier that sells more of my phones in the US market than any other, with a large population of millions of Nokia users ready to step up to the latest-and-greatest?
Or should I go with an exclusive on the larger #2 carrier who will have a half-dozen other "exclusive" phones in addition to mine at the same time, ticking off the smaller carrier who has historically sold most of my phones, while ensuring that my "exclusive" Lumia 920 collects dust on a back shelf and is only purchased by my brand's die-hards?
Should I go with an exclusive on the #2 carrier who promised me they'd sell 2 million Lumia 900s, but only ended up selling about 300,000?
Should I go with the exclusive on the #2 carrier who has almost no remaining Nokia users, and thus nobody to upgrade?