← Back to context

Comment by eslaught

2 years ago

I'm not saying this is a great letter, but he wasn't wrong. I owned both Symbian and Maemo devices, and the experience (both to use and develop) really was this bad. That's not to say everything about it was bad, or that there was nothing to like (as HN comments have often pointed out, there was), but it didn't hold a candle to iOS, or even Android. (And Android in those days was pretty hideous.)

Now what Nokia did in response... that may not have been right either. But they had to do something.

The letter talks about a man standing on a burning platform choosing to jump into the icy waters instead.

In this metaphor, Nokias actions were neither staying on the platform not jumping into the water but shooting itself in the head instead.

If the internally Nokia OSes were not going anywhere, which looked to be the case from the outside, the obvious solution was to go with Android. Something that already had the user base, had the apps, had the platform, was open source so it allowed for innovation and differentiation, and Nokia could tailor it to work well with their hardware.

Instead, he chose to go with Windows Phone which had absolutely no benefits. And had severe restriction the kind of phones Nokia could create and on the modifications they could make (they could barely even reskin it) and did not allow Nokia to leverage any software or hardware prowess they may have had.

  • Android was a choice. Not the obvious one. Seriously how many Android manufacturers are really successful? Samsung? Google? Pretty much everyone else is completely interchangeable in the crowd of low cost devices.

    LG, HTC, Sony …etc have all but disappeared and they all chose Android. Sony especially had some solid hits back in the day.

    Microsoft utterly failed Nokia but I don’t consider the decision at the time to be a terrible one.

    • Yeah, and it's not like Nokia was riding a winning streak in the pre-iPhone market. Nokia hadn't had a ubiquitous hit for several years - before the Razr, before the LG Chocolate, before the Blackberry, etc.

      They could have probably produced better hardware than the other Android makers - the N9 and first Lumias were very nice devices to hold and use - but they weren't exactly coming in with a ton of momentum in the market.

      2 replies →

    • > Android was a choice. Not the obvious one. Seriously how many Android manufacturers are really successful? Samsung? Google? Pretty much everyone else is completely interchangeable in the crowd of low cost devices.

      > LG, HTC, Sony …etc have all but disappeared and they all chose Android.

      Yeah, but that took a decade or more. Going with Windows was an insta-death. Going with Android would have given them at least a decade to decide on a strategy.

      Windows over Android was an insane choice, no matter which angle you look at it from.

    • Sony still has ten percent of the Japanese mobile market. Granted they'd be happier to be in the winners circle, but you've seen Sony's product strategy, selling a handful of phones to 10 million people is a business they're comfortable staying in. They'll sell you five different audio recorders, after all.

      Edit to add: the most popular vendor, by far, is Apple, with more than 60% of the market. Steve Jobs studied Sony very carefully, back in the day. It shows.

      1 reply →

But N9 was not a maemo it was Meego. It was incredibly polished it definitely was on par or better than android and IOS of the time.

While some of the assessments in the memo might be correct (it took way too long to get the N9 out for example), shouting this out to the public is incredibly stupid. I mean he is lamenting the fact they only have one top of the line phone out, but then decides to completely axe the system (and the pending new tip of the line phone) for making them and only sell the Symbian version which he just decried as being for lower end phones. And then wait another year or 2 until they have a Windows phone, a platform that they don't control and where they are completely reliant on MS and which is totally unproven?

Edit: OK reading up again, it seems I misremembered. It was actually the N9 which was the Meego phone released after the memo. It was essentially released that you had to be order specifically through an online system only at Nokia. It still gained wide critical acclaim, but at that point was poised to fail already.

  • > it took way too long to get the N9 out for example

    ...which is mostly because of infighting with Symbian team. Nokia N810 was supposed to be a phone already. Nokia N8 was supposed to me a lower end Meego device. Both didn't end up that way because of internal politics.

That his letter pointed out a real problem never seemed controversial. The shocking part was tying themselves to MS without a reasonable backup plan.

They thought they couldn't build hardware good enough to compete with other Android makers, but somehow convinced themselves that the solution to that was to put their less competitive hardware onto a less competitive platform.

  • > They thought they couldn't build hardware good enough to compete with other Android makers,

    But that is so wrong. Hardware was their strength. They could've sticked to what they knew best and over time do what's necessary.

  • > That his letter pointed out a real problem never seemed controversial.

    Only in retrospect. At the time, the internet was full of people who thought Symbian was Just Fine. And they had sales figures of millions of (mostly 12-key) "smartphones[0]" to prove it. And then this shifted to "Lost Causeism" when whatever MooMooMo platform never got off the ground.

    [0] Okay, I had one of these and you could check your email or do a google search, but obviously the iphone it was not.

I think it’s simple enough to see why Nokia thought Windows would be the right choice. It was far more polished than Android at the time. It ran well on cheap hardware. And they would have Microsoft backing them.

  • Elop did, Nokia engineering not so much.

    Our culture was pretty much anti-MS before he came on board.

    On the server side we were using HP-UX, Perl, C++, in 2005 the transition for Red-Hat Linux and Java started.

    On the devices, Symbian and the Maemo (Linux based).

    Symbian was finally getting usable with PIPS, Qt and Eclipse based Carbide.

    I happened to be in Espoo the week after this memo was published, I haven't found anyone that agreed with it.

    Everyone thought the community would never jump of joy with Microsoft technologies, and right they were.

    • I was a consultant working on two Meego projects at the time, fancy mechanics and some pretty interesting ideas about graph data storage and inference. Super talented crew of diverse hackers, kind of a tech head dream project thinking back on it now. This all was such a gut punch. I always thought they should have just rallied behind their own OS, but I don't claim to understand the business all that well.

      (edit: a highlight was getting to meet Dan Ingalls once; he was cool)

  • > I think it’s simple enough to see why Nokia thought Windows would be the right choice. It was far more polished than Android at the time

    Everyone knew at the time Elop had made a terrible choice crafted to sell Nokia to Microsoft. Here's a nice HN comment I saved that was written a few days after the memo: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2206437

    And then the Nokia transition was supposed to take two years! Posting a memo like this and then taking two years to transition while expecting customers to buy inventory on the old platform? That's just a way to kill a company.

  • As someone who owned a Windows phone around that time, and knew others who did as well, the shared opinion was that it was a pile of crap.

    Nokia went for Windows because of the acquisition target, not because of quality of the OS. With that, they prioritized business strategy over product quality, and we all know what happened after.

    • My memory is completely different. I was an iPhone user, but I bought a Nokia Lumia 710 (I think) to play with and I was thoroughly impressed. It was fast, fresh, the tile interface really worked well for phones - it looked much better than the boring grid of apps and gave useful information at a glance.

      But since Microsoft were 2-3 years late, there were not many apps. And then they shot themselves and all people who already bought a Windows Phone device in the foot, by completely forking the ecosystem with Windows Phone 8. Leaving early adopters stranded on Windows Phone 7 and no ability to run newer Windows Phone 8 apps.

    • > As someone who owned a Windows phone around that time, and knew others who did as well, the shared opinion was that it was a pile of crap.

      and had no apps. Windows Phone/Mobile had atrocious developer share. There few apps that were available were of terrible quality. Ironic, considering this happened in the era of a sweaty Balmer screaming "Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers!"[1]

      1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vhh_GeBPOhs

      1 reply →

    • While Windows Phone 7 wasn't that great, Windows Phone 8 was quite good.

      Used all Windows Phone versions, and they all got more updates than most my Android devices.

      Their market was around 10% in Europe when they decided to give up.

  • They brought in a trojan horse with Elop. Any sensible company at the time would have bet on both horses. E.g. Samsung and HTC had both Android and Windows Phone devices. IIRC there was even one Samsung model (I think a Samsung ATIV) that you could install both Android and Windows Phone 8 on.

  • I owned a WP7 and an Android around that time.

    Any WP7 polish advantage was skin deep at best. It took approximately 3-5 interactions for something to break in 3rd party apps and maybe twice that in first party apps.

    • What apps ?! That store they had was practically vacant so the phone basically ran on what it came installed with. Android was not as slick at that time but at least you had a ton of software and cooked ROMs

  • They already had Meego which was a true Linux distribution, already more polished than Android and fully Open Source; unfortunately the deal with Microsoft implied the termination of any further development of it in favor of Windows Mobile, and the rest is history.

  • WP7 was more polished than Android - I went from an HTC Evo to a Lumia - but a lot of that polish was in the same style as early-iOS: fewer features and capabilities, just done well and with better consistency.

    I think betting on either (a) MS beating Apple at their own game or (b) there being room in the market for two premium-limited-but-smoother-UX systems was a dicey call.

    Nokia's hardware design advantage over that HTC was MUCH larger than WP7's UI advantage over Android, anyway. I would've stuck with Android but moved to Nokia in a heartbeat if that sleek blue slab of plastic phone ran Android.

    • But that was at least a year after the memo. They already had an incredibly polished system, Meego. Now Meego like WP7 had the problem of limited apps for the platform, but there were quite a bit more than WP still, largely due to significant OSS apps having been ported. There was also a good development story using the qt framework.

      Also at the time of this memo, WP was essentially nonexistent. It was with Nokias switch that they gained some momentum and polish.

  • The cheapness of the hardware is an interesting point.

    I worked with an ex Nokia hardware engineer around that time and he said lots of them had left / been laid off (can't remember which) since Windows Phone could only run on quite specific chipsets (Qualcomm, I think), which basically made their jobs less useful.

    But if cost was a factor then maybe that was part of the point, rather than a side effect of the decision.

  • As a software engineer I'd have to disagree. In 2011 Windows on handheld devices was a consistently low quality product that had at least a decade of Microsoft failing at it behind it. Believing that Microsoft would suddenly be capable of producing a quality product after more than a decade of not being able to was a highly irrational view. And this isn't something you'd have to particularly clever to see back then.

    Let's not forget just how bad Microsoft products for handhelds were in the 2000s. (In fact, if you have any devices from back then, dig them out and try them. They are a lot worse than everyone seems to remember. And Microsoft released this stuff with a straight face).

    Android might have been behind in 2011, but it had more momentum and it didn't have bone cancer - it had sound bones. It was pretty obvious that Android was going to be the better bet when you have 1-2 years of lead time. As Nokia would have had anyway to get something put together.

    It is really hard to see how rational people would make such poor choices - unless motivated to do so.

I worked in Nokia at the time this happened and saw from the inside how the company was ran into the ground by internal incompetence, years of mismanagement, arrogance, and ineptness.

Stephen Elop gets the blame for this often but he was merely the messenger boy. Put there by a board that allowed all this to happen long before he was installed to quickly execute what had been decided by that board. And that board was lead by its former CEO Jorma Ollila. Who made Nokia big in the nineties and was instrumental in its demise and involved with all the key blunders in the ten years prior to selling the remains of the phone division to Microsoft.

Nokia thought they were being smart by jumping ship to Microsoft's Windows Phone. But the reality was that was the merely the latest in a series of very misguided moves that started in the late nineties when they failed to see the potential of Linux and bet on Symbian instead. Nokia's leadership had an enormous blindspot when it came to software. It's technical leadership consisted of people with radio and electrical engineering backgrounds. They were simply incapable of seeing what was happening very clearly in the industry in the late nineties. Linux was happening in a very big and obvious way. And it was inevitably going to run on phones. That was clear in 1999 and a reality before the first Symbian phones even shipped.

By the time Google bought Android, backing Symbian had very obviously been a bad move. By that time there were so many people trying to get Linux going on phones that it was just a matter of time before someone succeeded. Google wanted in on the action. Linux/Android was their quick way in.

Nokia was struggling to get Symbian to market while all that was happening. It was crap. The first versions crashed all the time and were really sluggish and klunky. Incidentally, Nokia actually killed a touch screen platform for Symbian that they never launced. In 2005 as the rumors about the iphone started circulating. Nokia was instead obsessing over flip phones and saw Motorola's razr as its biggest threat. So, it killed the touch screen platform mistakingly thinking that it was not needed.

All this was so obvious that in fact a department in Nokia took it upon themselves to build a Linux based platform. Maemo. The first product launched in late 2005. It was based on Debian Linux and featuring a UI built using GTK and a web browser that was based on Mozilla. A full six years before the first Ipad launched, Nokia had an linux based tablet with a touch screen. Exactly the right kind of thing to be bringing to market around then. Except the Nokia management was completely blind to this and kept on favoring Symbian.

Years later when Google finally unveiled Android after Apple launched the iphone. Google had been relying on a lot of the R&D that went into Maemo. As they lacked a phone until they launched the first Nexus, they even used the N800 as a development platform for Android. There was even a port of Android that you could boot on an N800. I know because I had one and tried it.

Google bought and eventually launched Android between 2005 and 2009. But it was Nokia that was doing a lot of the heavy lifting on kernel development. By 2008 Nokia had a very coherent platform strategy for launching a Linux based range of phones. By 2010 that strategy included a UI platform (QT), Meego, and a then still secret entirely new platform based on Linux aimed at feature phones that got unceremoniously cancelled in 2012 without a product ever having been launched.

Nokia's failure was favoring Symbian throughout this chaotic period until it was crystal clear that the market was never going to favor Symbian and that all attempts at open sourcing it and fixing it were simply not succeeding. By then Google was succeeding with Android and Apple was growing market share with the iphone without Nokia ever having gotten serious at even trying to compete with the platform it had all along.

The thing is, it took Google many years to turn Android into a decent platform after they launched it. The first versions had all sorts of issues with poor UX, poor performance, stability, security, etc. Manufacturers used it mainly because Symbian and Windows CE were worse and there wasn't much else in the market that they could use. And they were hopeless at doing software themselves. And while the iphone was popular, the first versions were pretty limited in features.

So, Nokia had a chance for several years to launch a platform based on the same Linux kernel that Android was using that they were using in Meego. They had all the pieces to pull that off; including a large base of existing users that still loved their Nokias. But they blew their chances because internally Symbian was the darling and people backing that spend years frustrating and delaying Meego.

Phones that were intended to launch with Meego in fact launched with Symbian. They bought Trolltech (QT) to fix the UI for Meego but that turned into a project to fix Symbian instead. The original Maemo devices were using GTK. That move delayed a Meego launch by three years or so as the UI platform they had was scrapped in favor of QT. The only Linux phone with QT that ever launched was the N9. And only after they decided to kill the platform and fire the team. The N900 before that (2009) was still using GTK. It was fine. I had one. Pretty awesome device at the time. Way nicer than anything Google was shipping. But it was very obviously a developer phone and never aimed at consumers ,and a bit klunky, and limited from a hardware point of view. Almost as if they wanted it to fail.

The N9 was launched after Stephen Elop had been appointed around the time of this silly memo. The decision to can it was of course taken before he joined. One of his first moves was killing that at the same time as he was killing Symbian. Basically, he killed Symbian, Meego, and Meltemi (the linux based feature phone platform) to make room for windows phone. In a bizarre move of defiance, Nokia actually managed to launch an Android phone just before MS acquired the phone unit and promptly killed that.

  • For me as a young outside software developer I saw the N900 and it was my dream phone. I couldn't afford a smartphone but I was ready to buy the N1000 when it came out. And then, it just didn't.

    In the IT school I was at Nokia was a regular topic of conversation. All of us completely frustrated that they were apparently unwilling to invest in a Linux based phone and everybody eventually getting an Android or IPhone.

    They really had a chance, they were at the right time with the close to the right product and just failed.

He wasn’t wrong, but he didn’t seem to understand what the impact this memo would have on the world outside of Nokia. Nokia relies on orders for phones from network operators and this memo pulled the rug from under those orders.

The Maemo/Megoo devices did a ton of stuff better then android. The multitasking was amazing in comparison. Some of basic apps were better.

And there is a pretty clear path to making an android comparability layer.

Also, even if you want to switch to Android (or Windows) just 'burn it all down' is a bad strategy. That was a profitable business and still had huge market share. Just pissing all over it wasn't a good plan.

The N9 was a better phone than anything they released subsequently. The TI OMAP being eol and the lack of 4g were for sure problems but Elops cure was worse than the disease.