[Interest] Semi-OT: What could / should Elop / Nokia have done differently?
tr3w at freemail.hu
Fri Jun 22 12:30:39 CEST 2012
> What -- in the face of the very real challenges Nokia faced -- would you have done?
As I heard the Nokia as a company has a really bad inner structure
with lots of duplications and fighting departments.
So first: I would streamline it. Drop Symbian, put all resources to Qt
We know N9 is almost good enough. What could it be if it has all the
support what went to the Symbian development?!
> And a follow-up question: Let's say you are appointed to replace Elop now. What -- given whatever
> water is already under the bridge, and in the face of the very real challenges Nokia faces now -- would you do now?
Port Qt to WP8. It's technically possible, and even if MS doesn't want
Qt in its app store, it can be used in the Ovi.
And it can be the little difference what makes the Nokia phones unique
and better than the rest of the WP world.
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Pau Garcia i Quiles
<pgquiles at elpauer.org> wrote:
> IMHO they should have released a Qtopia (Qt 4-based) phone 6 months
> after acquiring Trolltech, then keep developoing Maemo and replace
> Qtopia with Maemo only when Maemo would be ready. That would have
> given them a lot of Qt developers and a lot of applications and an
> operating system more powerful than Symbian.
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 11:06 PM, K. Frank <kfrank29.c at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello List!
>> Most of us have been following and talking about this whole
>> Nokia / Microsoft thing. A couple of recent discussions on
>> this list got me thinking about it again:
>> [Interest] Is Nokia officially done with Qt?
>> [Interest] Qt on Windows Phone 8
>> I would like to ask a related, but somewhat different question:
>> Clearly Nokia and Elop were and are facing a big business challenge.
>> What might they have done differently?
>> I'm hoping to avoid comments like this or that company is bad /
>> stupid / evil. It's easy enough to say that some folks did the
>> wrong thing, but harder to say, okay, here's what they could have
>> done differently.
>> I think that it's arguably the case that:
>> Nokia missed the iPhone revolution
>> therefore faced a significant threat to their business
>> therefore needed to make a dramatic (desperate?) move
>> so they joined forces with Microsoft
>> Now I like to hate on Microsoft as much as the next guy,
>> and so on and so forth, but what might Elop have done
>> differently? It's his job to try to save Nokia (or as
>> much of Nokia as he can), and not his job to try to save
>> Qt in particular.
>> It's not like Nokia could have partnered with Apple.
>> (Or maybe they could have. If somebody thinks that
>> could have been the case, that's exactly the kind of
>> discussion I'm looking for.)
>> It's easy but not very helpful to say things like
>> everybody's an idiot or so-and-so is a Microsoft
>> tool or Nokia should have invented the iPhone before
>> Apple did. I would like to approach this like a Harvard
>> Business School case study: Let's say you were appointed
>> CEO of Nokia instead of Elop back then. What -- in the
>> face of the very real challenges Nokia faced -- would
>> you have done? And a follow-up question: Let's say you
>> are appointed to replace Elop now. What -- given whatever
>> water is already under the bridge, and in the face of the
>> very real challenges Nokia faces now -- would you do now?
>> Thanks, and best regards.
>> K. Frank
>> Interest mailing list
>> Interest at qt-project.org
> Pau Garcia i Quiles
> (Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
More information about the Interest