"Secondly, another big client of the company, the operators, unanimously voted for a partnership with Microsoft as this will bring a third contender to the marketplace."
That sentence stood out the most from that article. For Nokia to say they choose this partnership because the operators want another choice seems insane to me. Basically I am interpreting that to mean the operators want more platforms to help give them leverage when negotiating with phone manufactures. Which could potential hurt Nokia in the future too.
Am I reading to much into this, or does Nokia's logic there strike anyone else as funny too?
No what this means is that the operators don't want to be stuck with Android vs. iOS; they would prefer a strong third option, which would be Nokia/MS.
Back in 2006, operators used to have dozens of manufacturers of smartphones at their disposal each with relatively weak OS platforms (RIM/Blackberry being the top at the time).
Then the iPhone came out and disrupted that market by offering the iOS platform. Then Android matured (using some iOS cues) and became the 2nd leading platform.
Right now, the third platform (Blackberry) is getting weaker by the day, while WP7 is not gaining traction. So a combined Nokia/MS could provide a strong 3rd option for worldwide operators.
None of this makes sense unless Nokia is the preferred manufacturer for Microsoft and not just another commoditized handset maker of Windows phones.
That sentence stood out the most from that article. For Nokia to say they choose this partnership because the operators want another choice seems insane to me. Basically I am interpreting that to mean the operators want more platforms to help give them leverage when negotiating with phone manufactures. Which could potential hurt Nokia in the future too.
Am I reading to much into this, or does Nokia's logic there strike anyone else as funny too?