Rumors of a Nokia-Microsoft alliance have us cringing at the very thought of tying Windows Phone 7 exclusively to Nokia devices. Here's why.

There has been a lot of chatter about the potential benefits of a Windows Phone 7 and Nokia merger, a scenario where the Finnish hardware-software maker would abandon its platforms and side with Microsoft, which would grant the company exclusive access to Windows Phone 7. Financial folk seem to love the idea; Nokia’s stock even started to rise on rumors that the company was actually investigating WP7. To those who think this is a good idea, I ask just one question: What the hell are you thinking? Merging Windows Phone 7 and Nokia would be like tying two drowning people together and hoping that together they can swim.

An open letter

This rumor began when Adnaan Ahmad of Berenberg Bank in Hamburg published an open letter to Nokia CEO Stephen Elop (a former MS employee) and Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, encouraging them to join forces and make Windows Phone 7 the exclusive platform of Nokia devices.

Here is a snippet of the brunt letter.

“Steve, you are probably thinking, ’What do we gain on the back of this?” Well, two million units shipped in the last quarter is not really much to write home about, given $500m in marketing programmes (ouch), but with Nokia on-side, you get access to a potential 20-25% global share over time – and EXCLUSIVITY. Right now, do you really think HTC, Samsung and LGE are pushing your products ahead of Google’s? You need to tie yourself to a high-volume player to be relevant, which I know goes against your DNA. But do not forget that your MS-DOS software was originally only for IBM and then claimed a near-monopoly in the market. And, Steve, if you are successful, we will all forget your quotes from 2007. Do you remember this one: ’Apple is a cute, little, tiny niche guy?’ Or this one: ’No chance Apple iPhone is going to get any significant market share?’ (Ouch x2.) More importantly, your shareholders are going to be impressed that you have not gone after an expensive acquisition strategy in what is really (let’s face it) a consumer electronics industry.”

Ahmad reasons that Nokia is spending too much on research and development (R&D) working on its own custom operating systems, and would benefit from the high-end smartphone market and U.S. access that Microsoft could help it attain. Microsoft, in return, gets eventual access to the large phone market share that Nokia currently holds around the rest of the world, and a partner that will focus on Windows Phone 7 exclusively. His reasons sound decent when written in a cheeky open letter, but they don’t hold up to reality. Neither Microsoft nor Nokia would benefit from a merging or exclusive arrangement.

A struggling manufacturer, a struggling OS

Nokia N8Yes, Nokia and Windows Phone 7 are both in trouble. While Nokia continues to do well around the world in the low-end feature-phone market, it has next to no presence in the United States, which has moved to more flexible, snappier app-based operating systems like Apple’s iOS and Google Android. Older smartphone OS’s like Nokia’s Symbian, RIM’s BlackBerry, and Microsoft’s Windows Mobile are being squeezed out of the market by these newer, shinier touch-based operating systems. Nokia has tried to adapt with devices like the N8, but hasn’t been able to find a U.S. wireless operator willing to subsidize its high-end phones for several years. As a result, most of its devices are only able to be ordered online, and are too expensive ($500+) to gain much traction.

Microsoft had a similar problem with Windows Mobile, but has been a lot more proactive in finding a solution. The company rewrote its mobile software from the ground up, basing much of it on the interface concepts developed on its underrated Zune brand of MP3 players. The fruit of its efforts, Windows Phone 7, hit the market on nine devices in early November to a reasonable amount of critical acceptance. The phone’s interface is a personal favorite of mine, and shows that Microsoft can develop a forward-thinking platform. Unfortunately, the OS has had a rocky start due to the mammoth popularity of Android devices and the iPhone 4. Through the holidays, Microsoft only sold about 2 million WP7 devices to retail partners — less than the software maker had hoped. With no new WP7 devices shown since launch, many have begun to fear for the OS’s future in the market. Certainly, 2011 will be an important year for Windows Phone 7 to show its strength. It should not, however, be the year Microsoft abandons the open licensing platform that made Windows (and Android) successful in the first place.

Exclusive partnership, a bad idea

So why not partner? Well, how would joining forces truly benefit Microsoft and Nokia? Yes, Nokia may save some money on R&D (though it can’t get back the billions it has already spent) and Microsoft would gain an exclusive partner with some actual market share around the world, but the benefits for both companies would be short-lived. By exclusively partnering, Microsoft would put great limits on the potential success of its WP7 platform and Nokia would be forced to follow Microsoft’s lead on software, something the company is not used to doing. A merger of this sort could also have the unintended consequence of further miring both of these traditionally bureaucratic companies in a tangled web of decision-making.

A joint Microsoft and Nokia would mean that one of the least successful platforms (so far) in the United States was partnering with one of the least successful hardware makers. While there is still a glimmer of hope that WP7 will take off over time, Nokia has shown little to no ability to adapt to the North American market. Its devices look out of place, and often antiquated, when put next to competitors that understand the market like Samsung, HTC, Apple, and Motorola. Building WP7 into its hardware will not give either company more leverage in the United States or other high-end smartphone markets.

Today’s high-end markets will trickle devices to tomorrow’s low-end markets. Android and iPhone smartphones have already shown great growth in most markets around the world. Even Nokia’s iron grip on the feature phone market appears to be slipping as customers begin to move to more media-rich devices.

You can go your own ways

Microsoft’s chief competitor is Android, an OS that has taken the Windows model of being on any device and taken it to the Nth level. Android is a completely open-source platform, free for anyone or any device manufacturer to use. Tying itself to one device manufacturer is the opposite of what Microsoft needs to do to compete with Google. Microsoft’s success depends on Windows Phone 7 infecting every device, not just the devices of one manufacturer. WP7 is already an elegant and competitive OS, but MS should learn from its slow debut in the U.S. that it must take a cue from Google and make its platform less expensive to license, more open, and more customizable by hardware makers.

Nokia has always been a hardware and software company. Like Apple, it has thrived on marrying its hardware to its own customized operating systems. Nokia does have a bloated R&D budget,  but I’d argue that such an inflated emphasis on research and development is necessary for the Finnish company. For years, it has fallen behind industry trends. It now must catch up. The company has spent billions creating its Ovi brand, adding new features like Ovi Maps turn-by-turn navigation to its phones, and creating a completely new OS named MeeGo, which it is set to unveil sometime this year, perhaps on Feb. 11. Why would Nokia abandon MeeGo before it ever has a chance on the market? Nokia has placed all of its eggs (billions of dollars) into MeeGo. It would be almost schizophrenic to abandon a near-finished OS in favor of a new, but struggling platform like Windows Phone 7.

With that said, it would not hurt either company to partner on a few devices or a line of devices. Nokia could use diversification in its product line and Microsoft could stand to benefit from any hardware maker supporting Windows Phone 7 in a substantial way. Such a non-exclusive partnership would show that Nokia is willing to change and that WP7 is still interesting to some hardware makers. All of this talk about exclusive partnerships is ridiculous. It would be a bad move for Nokia and Microsoft. However, it never hurts to make a new friend, and both Microsoft and Nokia could use a friend right now.

Showing 14 comments

  1. WV_Mom at 6:04am 7th February 2011 Got Nokia E71x almost 2 years ago and loved it, with wi-fi, push e-mail . . . very sleek profile. I moved from Nokia to Motorola (and from AT&T to Verizon) after AT&T discontinued push e-mail for my device in December 2010. They ceased "Xpress Mail," and offered no other "push" e-mail options for non-corporate users. This is an instance where the carrier killed the phone. However, AT&T also shot themselves in the foot, because when I gave up and asked for help to choose a new phone, they could not provide me with information about options for push e-mail without enterprise server. I saved the "live chat" thread because it was so bizarre. My Nokia was a fine phone, until AT&T sacrificed it.
  2. ioman at 1:59pm 5th February 2011 Sad to see all of the Windows Phone 7 fanboys in here. I totally get that you guys love the OS and want nothing more than seeing it paired with good hardware. Jeff is right though, Nokia has always created their own path, just like Apple in having their own OS and hardware married together. It's sad that they will have to choose a 3rd party platform for their phones. I don't think WP7 is it though. I don't trust Microsoft enough to support the hardware vendors, or to make anything unique enough for Nokia to use. I think Nokia needs to play it safe and go with the Android OS. At least Android will let hardware manufacturers add their own layer on top of the OS (like HTC's Sense layer). That is what Nokia should really be doing.
  3. Jasper at 7:22am 5th February 2011 This article is erroneous, turn by turn navigation on nokia phones a new idea, huh?
    1. Jeffrey Van Camp at 2:03pm 5th February 2011 It was launched worldwide in Jan. 2010. I've added a link to the article. It isn't very old. But you're right, it didn't happen yesterday.
  4. Matt at 12:30am 5th February 2011 I don't think WP7 is a struggling OS at all. The app store is growing at an impressive rate unlike platforms that have failed in recent years (webOS, BlackBerry, and Windows Mobile 6.5). They have over a million downloads of the development tools for WP7. Critics seem to love the new OS despite the fact that it is still so young and in need of some feature updates. Some of the phones like the Samsung Focus have received extremely positive reviews. I'm curious to see how MS handles updates for the platform before I decide if I will get one for myself. I think this article is idiotic. Nokia support for WP7 would be huge and have a tremendous impact on the success of the platform.
    1. Jeffrey Van Camp at 2:04pm 5th February 2011 I agree that Nokia support for WP7 would be great. This article argues against an exclusive relationship between WP7 and Nokia. I also think WP7 has potential, but its launch has not gone as smoothly as Microsoft (or I) had hoped. I like the OS quite a bit.
  5. Storm Holloway at 11:18pm 4th February 2011 http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2379380,00.a... That's how you write an article on this subject, and the author doesn't even agree with me.
  6. Joey Morrison at 11:10pm 4th February 2011 the internet media is such a follow the leader format now... sad half of the articles bashing wp7 don't even make sense and clearly show lack of research and knowledge.
  7. Storm Holloway at 10:56pm 4th February 2011 I couldn't disagree more with this article, and I haven't finished it yet (so perhaps I could disagree more). Nokia is only experiencing a hiccup. They make fine products and have really only been hindered by their OS. MS' Windows Phone 7 has seen rather positive critical acclaim but hasn't received proper exposure due to the ubiquity of Android. Anyone with half a business brain and see that there is the potential for a fantastic symbiotic relationship here. Personally, I love the look of WinPhone 7 and have always adored Nokia hardware. I think it's a great match. Frankly Jeffrey you don't even support your arguments: "Yes, Nokia may save some money on R&D and Microsoft would gain an exclusive partner with some actual market share around the world, but the benefits for both companies would be short-lived. A joint Microsoft and Nokia would meant that one of the least successful platforms in the United States was partnering with one of the least successful hardware makers." And this means what? That because MS doesn't dominate the market with its mobile OS since launching a few months ago and Nokia has struggled for a couple of years, they shouldn't partner up? I don't get it. There is nothing in this article that demonstrates that this wouldn't be a successful formula. Then you go on to argue this: "Nokia has always been a hardware and software company. Like Apple, it has thrived on marrying its hardware to its own custom operating systems. Nokia does have a bloated R&D budget, but I’d argue that such an inflated emphasis on research and development is necessary for the Finnish company. For years, it has neglected its duty to keep ahead of industry trends. It now must catch up. ... Nokia has placed all of its eggs in MeeGo. It’s not about to move them all to a struggling platform like Windows Phone 7." Look, Nokia isn't Apple Jeffrey, and it doesn't have to be. You argue that MS and Nokia shouldn't marry because they're struggling but then insist Nokia continue to pour countless billions into R&D for an OS that the market doesn't like? What sense does that make? Windows Phone 7 is still dripping in afterbirth; perhaps it was even launched somewhat prematurely. It hasn't been market-tested like Nokia's OS and has the Microsoft's piggy bank to ensure its lifespan. And to Patrick Hentges above: can you imagine what AT&T would be without the iPhone for the past 4 years? No-thing. Just a low-rent service provider running Android. AT&T should be singing praises to Apple for even putting their awful service on the map. How'd that work for Apple and AT&T? Can you imagine AT&T without Apple?
    1. Jeffrey Van Camp at 2:02pm 5th February 2011 Thank you for your reply and the link to PC Mag's editorial on the subject, which I enjoyed. I wish you would have read the article to the end, because I think you have misinterpreted some of my statements. I have made several small adjustments to the article to clarify my wording. I believe I support my points as clearly as needed and I intended to. I have no issues with WP7 as it exists. I really like the platform, actually. It, however, has not been received well so far, for varying reasons. I state clearly that both companies could benefit from a line of Nokia devices (or a single flagship device) being loaded with Windows Phone 7. If executed and marketed well, this could help both companies. But the idea of merging WP7 and Nokia phones exclusively does not make sense to me, mainly because Nokia would be abandoning MeeGo and Microsoft would be limiting its own platform by tying itself to only one vendor. It goes against what we know about both companies. From what I have heard about MeeGo, it could be a very interesting platform and a potential game-changer for Nokia itself. What do you have against it? The company has poured billions into developing it. Why abandon that work at the 11th hour? What if RIM had abandoned QNX before it came to fruition? After viewing RIM's BlackBerry PlayBook tablet at CES (which is based on QNX), I think it has a great shot on the market when integrated into new tablets and touch phones. In addition, Microsoft's main competitor in mobile is Android. Android has become the Windows of the smartphone world. It is on almost every device that isn't made by Apple these days. If Microsoft isn't careful, Android may become an extremely dominant platform that is impossible to crack down, much like Windows is to PCs. If this happens, it could be devastating to Microsoft's core business in the long run. The solution to WP7 not taking off as well as it should have is not to abandon licensing to different vendors and focus only on Nokia devices. That is ridiculous. It needs to do the opposite. WP7 should be on Nokia devices and devices by every hardware maker. It is a fantastic OS. I think MS should find ways to let each hardware maker customize the experience, but that is a personal opinion. AT&T is a wireless operator. For the most part, AT&T has been the main carrier for WP7 so far and it did not help Microsoft. Soon, it will have WP7 devices on CDMA from what I understand. Comparing an AT&T/Apple exclusive agreement to WP7 and Nokia does not make much sense.
      1. Joe_H at 7:22pm 9th February 2011 "Microsoft would be limiting its own platform by tying itself to only one vendor." Let me ask you a simple question. What makes you think that if this deal goes through, WP7 will only be available on Nokia phones? That would stupid. Nothing I've read on this deal says anything about WP7 being exclusive to Nokia only. In fact, even if the deal went through, WP7 won't even have exclusivity on Nokia phones. Nokia will retain a second OS, probably Symbian, for their low ends. All this deal means is Nokia will now have access to WP7 and a great OS to give it more access to the U.S. market. Microsoft will have more access to a very successful European company who makes great hardware. It doesn't, IMHO mean that WP7 won't be available on HTC, Samsung, LG, Dell, etc. It already is available on those phones. "I think MS should find ways to let each hardware maker customize the experience, but that is a personal opinion. " HELL NO! WP7 does not need to screwed with. That's one of the many problems with Android, which is already a POS in my opinion. I know, because I used one for 9 months. That has caused massive hardware and software fragmentation that WP7 doesn't need. WP7 is already an elegant, beautiful OS. Android is ugly. That's why every one wants to re-skin it. "From what I have heard about MeeGo, it could be a very interesting platform and a potential game-changer for Nokia itself. What do you have against it?" It's a pile of crap Jeffrey. Going exclusively with bad platforms like Symbian and MeeGo is what's hurting the company now. Nobody wants these platforms because they stink. They are a disaster. As for WP7 sales, anyone who thought Microsoft's new mobile OS was going to explode on the market and sell like gangbusters is an idiot. Microsoft ignored the mobile market for two years, and lost a lot of consumer confidence because of it. WP7 is two years late. If Microsoft wants to get back into this industry, they're going to have to fight and claw their way back in. They're also going to have to pull their heads out of their ass and start updating WP7 much more frequently. Get it up to feature parity, and advertise it by showing why it's different and better than Android.
    2. Sunny Youn at 12:30pm 6th February 2011 I agree with Jeff Van Camp's assessment, though. Microsoft's WP7 seems to benefit consumers who might want to integrate a smartphone w/ other MS Office-type of applications (like PowerPoint or Excel), which have more of an enterprise feel. The fact that Nokia's current CEO (Stephen Elop) *headed* up Microsoft's Business division implies there might be a predisposition for linking the two brands. However, the success of Nokia's devices globally, where they were the #1 phone device manufacturer, has been for low-end, cheaper phones in emerging market countries like China and India, who use SMS features for so-called supply-chain ordering.
  8. Patrick Hentges at 10:31pm 4th February 2011 "and EXCLUSIVITY" How'd that work for Apple and AT&T? Verizon has the answer to that if you need it.
    1. ioman at 11:07pm 4th February 2011 Exclusivity for several years helped made AT&T huge. Verizon is getting an old iPhone (the new iPhone 5 or upgrade, should be available on AT&T this June - before Verizon gets it).
Close Suggestion Investors back call for Apple succession plan
View Article