What Nokia Must Do To Stay Relevant In Mobile

snydeq writes "Mikael Ricknäs reports how Nokia can turn around its three-year slide in the mobile market — one that has transformed the company's iconic N95 into a distant memory given the pace of innovation at Apple and around Android. Completely underestimating the impact of the iPhone, Nokia took too long to realize that Symbian's lack of touch capabilities would hinder its ability to compete in the smartphone market. Moreover, the company's move to open source the OS has significantly slowed down Symbian's development, according to analysts, leaving Nokia with both a lack of support from other vendors and a platform on which competitors can keep a close eye. Meanwhile, developer interest in Nokia's Ovi app store is nearly nonexistent. 'Nokia's problems are still fixable but the window is closing. I am not optimistic that they will be fixed in 2010 because there isn't much time left; if they aren't fixed in 2011, Nokia will be in big trouble.'"

Comments

Probably the best thing they could do is license..

[RocketRabbit]

Probably the best thing they could do is license iOS from Apple. What are the other options? Put out the same exact Android phone that everybody else is?

If they paid Apple enough money it could happen.

What Nokia Must Do To Stay Relevant In Mobile

[sexconker]

Exactly what they're doing now?
Protip: "Relevant in "mobile"" does not mean "Relevant with a bunch of nerds and iTards".

Re:Did the author completely overlook,,,

[Hurricane78]

Oh, you mean like Apple?
Oh wait... they don’t have a SINGLE great product. Except if you’re from the deprived US market, where Apple’s crap is acceptable, simply because of how horrible the market is.

Nokia actually does not care whatsome rich dude in a rich country thinks of their product line. They make and sell what works. And in 99% of the world, that means a phone that’s not too expensive, and is usable in daily life, while still having lots of functions. That’s what gives you sales.

Oh, and protip: Every time I read a comparison in an European mobile phone magazine / site (like Xonio), the Apple phone gets far less points for the simple fact that they lack half the functions and features expected to be standard nowadays. Like, for example, a replacable battery. Or like a good quality cam. Or all the small but nice things. Like copy and paste and a full keyboard. Sure, Apple catches up. But why go with mediocre just because the thing is shiny and faggy?