Slashdot Mirror


The Story of Nokia MeeGo

An anonymous reader writes "TaskuMuro, a Finnish tech news site, has anonymously interviewed various Nokia employees and pieced together an interesting timeline of the events which led to the abandonment of the Nokia MeeGo platform and to Nokia's current affiliation with Microsoft and Windows Phone. It appears the MeeGo project was rather disorganized from the get-go and fell victim to the company's internal tug-of-war, aimless management causing several UI redesigns and a none-too-wise reliance on Intel components which lacked some key features – namely, LTE support."

25 of 125 comments (clear)

  1. Wow by binarylarry · · Score: 2

    I've considered Elop to be a massive fuck up but this sounds pretty bad. Maybe his move to Microsoft wasn't completely moronic (even if it ultimately kills the company because no one buys windows phones).

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    1. Re:Wow by mystikkman · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Symbian was even worse. They had different branches of code for each phone and they were each run by middle managers who were always at loggerheads with each other and refused to merge code from their competing teams. Not to mention they always tried to scuttle any move away from Symbian.

    2. Re:Wow by Sarten-X · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You must realize, Microsoft has a long tradition of maintaining an internal tug-of-war, led by aimless management, and causing several UI redesigns. They're the perfect choice to synergize with Nokia's corporate environment to leverage their assets for market innovation!

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    3. Re:Wow by Kingkaid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nokia didn't have a choice to partner with anyone but Microsoft. If they stayed with Symbian they were dead. MeeGo was dead before being born. Blackberry would have never partnered with them. Apple would have never partnered with them. This leaves Microsoft and Google. If they choose Google they are now competing on the same platform against a much cheaper Korean and Chinese manufacturers and designers. I am sure they could have made a go of it, but the company would have shrunk and likely be in worse shape than they are now. Microsoft was desperate for a partner and champion, so it was a match made in heaven. Now this doesn't say they won't die, but given where they were it was the best move to make.

    4. Re:Wow by Kartu · · Score: 2

      Nokia, known for great hardware, still selling gazillion of cheap phones (guess where they are produced? Nope, not in Finland) would have problems competing with the likes of Samsung, hence it had to become Microsoft's EXCLUSIVE delivery boy, how could that make sense, considering NON EXISTENT smartphone market share of Microsoft?

    5. Re:Wow by Darinbob · · Score: 4, Informative

      They used to have a normal organizational structure. Phones division, network division, research division, etc. Then in early 2000's it decided to go with a "grid" style structure. Business phones vs personal phones vs whatever going horizontally, and CMDA vs GSM etc going vertically, things like that. The traditional organization style is what got Nokia from a smallish company to a major world power; the new grid style ended up with 50+ different phones doing essentially the same thing and a shrinking of the market share.

    6. Re:Wow by rtfa-troll · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This is another repeat of the "Nokia wouldn't be able to make their phones special under Android so they would just compete on price". I'm still trying to work out how the shills can even say this "couldn't differentiate" bullshit with a straight face. Let's get this right:

      with Android you have the source code and support for almost all available hardware; You are allowed to change the interface and a number of companies have already done son. Also you are allowed to add any applications you want of your own. This makes it impossible to differentiate your phone from other ones

      With Windows; there is a small set of limited standard hardware; There is no support for proper cameras which is why PureView had to be crippled to work on it. The interface is controlled by Microsoft and is pretty much the same commodity system on all phones. The apps are forced to a secondary role by Microsoft controlled "hubs" which limit the possibilities for presenting data. All of this adds up to an operating system where Nokia has excellent opportunities to differentiate.

      Based on their inability to differentiate using Android, Nokia were wise to go with Microsoft, where not only will they have to compete with the same much cheaper "Korean and Chinese manufacturers" (who seem to be actually getting MS backing to release ahead of Nokia) but they will also have to compete with Microsoft a company which sees its self as devices company.

      ' Really; that's basically what you are saying. Astounding.

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    7. Re:Wow by CockMonster · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Symbian Ltd employees who were bought by Nokia could not believe how fucked up Nokia was at software. To be honest, I'm wasn't aware of any competition between teams but I wasn't in Finland.

    8. Re:Wow by binarylarry · · Score: 2

      Thanks CockMonster!

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    9. Re:Wow by davester666 · · Score: 2

      Yea, they still compete against Android on features and price. Only now they can have the bulletpoint "Includes More Microsoft Software", not realizing that 1) There is insignificant demand for Microsoft Phone OS
      and
      2) More and more people have a general dislike for Microsoft software. They don't use it out of choice.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  2. Re:MeeGo name is strange. by binarylarry · · Score: 3, Funny

    MeeGo, the scourge of Carpathia, the sorrow of Moldavia, commands you!

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
  3. How can big companies fail so hard by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 2

    You have to figure they're recruiting the best of the best, yet some of them manage epic F-ups. I can't imagine there weren't howls of disapproval from at least a few people in that organization.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  4. subcontracting by mrquagmire · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "...it was difficult to keep hold of the quality of the subcontractors' work..."
    "...bad code written in India..."
    "...communication problems..."

    I'm shocked. How upper management types keep justifying this model with "lower costs" is completely beyond me.

    --
    giggity
    1. Re:subcontracting by BLToday · · Score: 2

      I've been there. It goes like this:
      a) hardware manager is require to get his cost of the project to a level required by upper management => he subcontracts to the cheapest guys around => gets promoted because he exceeded his target.

      b) software manager is require to get his cost of the project to a level required by upper management => he subcontracts to the cheapest guys around => gets promoted because he exceeded his target.

      c) QA manager says whatever because hardware and software is substandard => collects his salary and push the product out

      d) upper management doesn't know why projects keep failing.

    2. Re:subcontracting by CockMonster · · Score: 4, Informative

      The 'bad code written in India' mainly came from the SoC manufacturers who'd write the baseports and drivers, in my time they were Broadcom and ST-Ericsson. (The Raspberry Pi uses the same graphics hardware as the N8). They were so flaky you couldn't believe. And on top of that Nokia management expected the entire stack to be developed in parallel. It was unworkable, they'd release new Symbian environments a few times a day and if it worked you got lucky, if it didn't you just wasted 4 hours downloading Gigs of rubbish only to have to delete it and see if anyone else had a working env. There were other Nokia-proper teams in India but the code they wrote shouldn't have brought down a board and if it did there was usually a workaround. However due to the *appalling communication* within Nokia it was nigh-on impossible to find out what the workaround was, or even who to ask. We'd have to do test runs everyday yet the phones in development crashed constantly and unpredictably so you couldn't tell if it was your code causing the problem or something else. Managers demanded answers and ignored the truth. To be fair the whole system was so fucked there really was nothing that could have been done. The subcontractors that I knew of were Sasken and another I can't think of right now.

  5. Not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Nokia builds great hardware, great cameras, has assets for mapping and navigation and they had 3000 people working on Software. With Android and some hard furious work they could have done some amazing things, no doubt.

  6. I need a new phone soon by tantrum · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My N900 is almost 3 years old, and it is starting to show it's age. I really hope the combination mer/sailfish will turn out ok, as i haven't found anything able to replace my current N900 yet.

    I'm going to miss Nokia if they go down for good :(

  7. Slight re-evaluation of Elop by Duncan+J+Murray · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'd always assumed Meego had been canned because Elop is a Microsoft Trojan Horse who just wanted to get back into bed with Microsoft and kill anything new, open-source and great. But reading this story of events, I'm quite dismayed to read just how unguided and wasteful the development process apparently was. Even though the final end product (the N9) was terrific, it looks like they only got it properly together when they were told that the project would be canned after the release of the N9. It really does look like a lack of overriding vision and lack of staff working towards a common goal which resulted in the Meego project swimming in circles while the tide took them out.

    Going with Microsoft was obviously a bad choice, though. What he needed to do was scrap Symbian, say that Meego would be scrapped after the N9. Pretend to sign a deal with Microsoft. Wait for the greatness that was the N9. Sell the N9. Profit. Develop the N9 to get it to work on LTE., upgrade the processor, memory etc & Profit more...

    1. Re:Slight re-evaluation of Elop by gl4ss · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "too many cooks spoil the broth"

      once it was announced dead platform, the shit cooks went away. up until then it was billed as "the next thing" withing nokia and finnish scene - ironically it was at that state since announcement in maemo form, it was always 2-3 years from being on every nokia phone, however symbian and s40 were always going to run on inferior hw so that's why it was for the whole time in that "future" bracket.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  8. The best do not matter without focus by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You have to figure they're recruiting the best of the best, yet some of them manage epic F-ups.

    Like the article said though, the teams were great what they were coming up with was great - but they lacked focus, and Nokia was working on multiple platforms at once.

    You cannot do that when Google and Apple both ALSO have great teams, also working but all with a focus on one system. Nokia was fated to fall behind these other platforms without the focus on building out a single ecosystem at the same pace Apple and Google were.

    It's really a shame, Nokia had an awesome starting position and smart people. But in the end I have to agree with Elop that they were too far behind and the Microsoft partnership was the only way to let them catch up and yet stay distinct in the market (which would have been an issue with Android for Nokia).

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  9. N9 is still my favorite phone to develop for by CreamyG31337 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The phone itself is running x11 which is really great for porting apps to it. You get to use c++ and the great qt framework and extensions for pretty much everything, with the option of doing the UI in QML (a javascript based framework). You get to use deb packaging which you either know already or doesn't hurt to learn. If you use the qt creator sdk it does all the dirty work for you, but you can develop without it and just use the scratchbox environment instead if you prefer. Services run with upstart. The xterminal and related developer tools are already compiled and hosted in nokia's repositories, one click to install everything. The fcam camera api allows raw shooting and manual aperture and focus. Gnome tracker indexes your messages and music. The nolo bootloader can be set up to dual boot to another OS. I look forward to the new Sailfish OS promised by Jolla, I have faith the guys writing it are the ones behind some of the well designed N9 OS, and won't make it any worse. I tried windows phone 7 and you're not even allowed to run background services, let alone run your own code without paying a $99 fee.

  10. The real problem: in-fighting by hydrofix · · Score: 2

    Even before Nokia scrapped its whole smartphone strategy, the MeeGo project was in difficulties. The biggest problem was that Nokia clung to Symbian, refusing to see the obvious fact that the customers were attracted to the competitors' platforms because they had a much stronger offering of 3rd party apps. MeeGo/Maemo was a good development platform, but internal competition between teams meant that the managers of the much older Symbian division would do anything in their power to stall the development of the "competing" platform. Although this might have shielded a few jobs in the Symbian division for a short period, Nokia's customers, and eventually the company as a whole, had to pay a very dire price for this indecisiveness.

    Relevant quotes:

    First signs of Nokia’s internal competition between two platforms were seen with the N810 device. It was released in late 2007 and entered the market without phone functionality. It would have been Nokia’s first Maemo phone, but the decision to leave out the phone functionality was said to have been completely political.

    According to a Maemo team member we interviewed, Symbian team directors were afraid of the possible competition between the N810 and the Symbian based communicator.

    Inside Nokia, members of the Maemo team thought that the managers of the Symbian team were afraid for their jobs, and used their positions within the company to slow down the development of Maemo by any means they could.

    N9 will remain most critically acclaimed and one of the fastest-selling and anticipated models in the company's history. Sadly, it could have been so much more, the beginning of a new platform like Android and iOS, but it was ultimately an executive-level decision to prioritize Symbian over Maemo. With falling market figures, this eventually lead to a situation where the whole strategy had to be scrapped in favor of Microsoft serfdom.

    1. Re:The real problem: in-fighting by hydrofix · · Score: 3, Informative

      ... in nerd mythology. Nobody outside Nokia has seen the real sales figures, though.

      Right on. Here is the estimate (by Tomi Ahonen, a blogger and ex-employee).

    2. Re:The real problem: in-fighting by 21mhz · · Score: 2

      Ahonen is the single identifiable origin of this myth.

      --
      My exception safety is -fno-exceptions.
  11. Please stop repeating that nonsense. by Tharald · · Score: 4, Informative

    Seriously, I agree with all but the Android part. Back in 2010 Nokia was the biggest phone maker in the world, both in smart and dumbphones. They had the distribution network, the manufacturing capabilities and the brand name to keep that position. With Android they could have stayed in this position, possibly losing a bit of it or gained a bit more depending on their implementation and quality, but they would still have had a fighting chance to be the top dog.

    Why the hell has Samsung gone from a bit player to a giant with Android while we should think that Nokia couldn't even keep their dominating position with the same system? It just doesn't compute. Of course Nokia should have seen the lights 5-6 years ago and either dedicated themselves to Meego/maemo or they should have jumped ship and gone with Android. But they would still have a be in a position if they had gone with Android instead of Windows close to 2 years ago. Of course they could still have fucked up, but saying they couldn't have competed with Android just makes no sense at all.