Notices


Reply
Thread Tools
Posts: 992 | Thanked: 738 times | Joined on Jun 2010 @ Low Earth Orbit
#341
Originally Posted by gerbick View Post
How can you say that I'm mixing up sales figures and market share? They're one in the same. You sell more - and there's only so many humans on the planet- then you will have more market share.

Explain the fallacy in that. Where's the mistake in that?
Easy.
  • sales figures are absolute numbers
  • market share is a percentage
  • total size of market (for purposes of calculating market share) is not the same as the potential size of the market (ie your reference to "there's only so many humans on the planet")
Simple hypothetical example:

Assuming there are only 2 widget manufacturers, ACorp and NCorp.

Last year, they each sold 100 million widgets. So out of a market size of 200 million widgets they each have a 50% share.

This year, the economy is better and people are buying more widgets and there's a demand for 500 million widgets. However because the CEO of NCorp had been making disparaging remarks about its own widgets they have discouraged some potential customers from buying their widgets. These customers instead buy from ACorp. So this year ACorp had their best ever year yet and sold 300 million widgets. NCorp also had their best ever year yet and sold 200 million widgets - twice as much as last year, unfortunately their market share had also dropped from 50% to 40%.
 
Posts: 992 | Thanked: 738 times | Joined on Jun 2010 @ Low Earth Orbit
#342
Originally Posted by ossipena View Post
That is pretty close to my initial 6800 people IMO...
Whatever the real numbers are the fact remains that most of them are working on ever more inventive ways to cripple the dozens or so devices that Nokia makes, to create differentiation and market segmentation. If all this energy was directed to making the OS and UI better then Nokia wouldn't be in the position they're in today.
 
stickymick's Avatar
Posts: 999 | Thanked: 797 times | Joined on Mar 2010
#343
Originally Posted by kureyon View Post
Whatever the real numbers are the fact remains that most of them are working on ever more inventive ways to cripple the dozens or so devices that Nokia makes, to create differentiation and market segmentation. If all this energy was directed to making the OS and UI better then Nokia wouldn't be in the position they're in today.
Pretty much a hitting the nail on the head statement. And I'm damn certain they were almost there with Maemo 5.

But, for the life of me, I can't get the gist of their UK Lumia marketing campaign.

Tichy Stryder?
__________________
Mick has just punched the cr@p out of the "Unlike" button on the Official Nokia Facebook Page.
 
Posts: 202 | Thanked: 533 times | Joined on Jul 2011
#344
Originally Posted by ossipena View Post
I must eat my words because a good point appeared.

The number 6800 comes from: 4000 people sacked + 2800 symbian developers moved to accenture (read: you can say no more subcontracting work and it is accenture who has to pay the devs, not nokia).

It was a straightforward conclusion:
1. drop symbian
2. lay off 6800 employers from inhouse

the symbian figure probably isn't that big alltogether when reviewed by todays numbers: 4000 blue collar people sacked around western area and replaced with chinese.

now when doing some research, I found out following:

There are some references that symbian has required approximately 3000 peoples work but gsmarenas story tells that there was ~3000 symbian developers (2800 in my numbers) + 4000 other employers,


http://www.gsmarena.com/nokia_transf...-news-2566.php

care to quess the size of MeeGo R&D? how many promilles from the whole amount?

and another article in finnish about brain drain that says nokia has 13000 employers and ~50% (tolerance?!?) of them working on Symbian/MeeGo

http://www.taloussanomat.fi/informaa...at/20112959/12

That is pretty close to my initial 6800 people IMO...
We know in 2010, the year before Elop sabotaged Symbian, NOKIA sold 103.6 Million smart devices.

We know (because ZTE have announced it) that the cost of a license for WP7 is $24 to $32 depending on the standard of device it's to be used on. To be conservative we'll use the lower figure of $24

We don't know the exact number of developers NOKIA employed to work on Symbian, articles I've read seem to vary in estimate between 3,000 and 6,000. To be conservative we'll use the higher figure of 6,000.

So let's take NOKIA's unit shipments in smart devices in 2010 (i.e. before Elop's act of sabotage) and multiply it by the license fee per device that NOKIA would have had to pay if those devices had been running WP7 (we'll have to use our imaginations a little here as there's never seemed any likelihood of WP7 devices selling in these vast quantities):

103,600,000 * $24 = $2,486,400,000

Let's then divide that by the number of Symbian developers NOKIA employs so we get an annual cost per developer:

$2,486,400,000 / 6,000 = $414,400

So NOKIA would only make a saving from this plan of action if the average annual cost of employing each Symbian developer was greater than $414,000.

Mmm... do you think that's likely?

And we were being conservative! If the number employed in the Symbian team was at the lower end of the spectrum and the license fee is at the upper end then we would only be talking about making a saving if the average annual cost of employing each Symbian developer was greater than $1,105,067 per annum!

Then of course you need to start factoring in the increased hardware costs because WP7 is much more demanding on resources than Symbian and it supports a much narrower range of components.

You also have to consider the loss of control, M$ developers are not directly employed by NOKIA and so their priorities will not always be the same as NOKIA's priorities.

It seems very clear to me that every single thing Elop has done has been to the benefit of M$ and to the detriment of NOKIA.
 
erendorn's Avatar
Posts: 738 | Thanked: 983 times | Joined on Apr 2010 @ London
#345
forgetting that MS pays Nokia a billion a year and that they have special licence agreement (ie, less than 24$, could even be nothing at all at the beginning for what we know) is not being "conservative"
 
ossipena's Avatar
Posts: 3,159 | Thanked: 2,023 times | Joined on Feb 2008 @ Finland
#346
Originally Posted by switch-hitter View Post
We know in 2010, the year before Elop sabotaged Symbian, NOKIA sold 103.6 Million smart devices.

We know (because ZTE have announced it) that the cost of a license for WP7 is $24 to $32 depending on the standard of device it's to be used on. To be conservative we'll use the lower figure of $24

We don't know the exact number of developers NOKIA employed to work on Symbian, articles I've read seem to vary in estimate between 3,000 and 6,000. To be conservative we'll use the higher figure of 6,000.

So let's take NOKIA's unit shipments in smart devices in 2010 (i.e. before Elop's act of sabotage) and multiply it by the license fee per device that NOKIA would have had to pay if those devices had been running WP7 (we'll have to use our imaginations a little here as there's never seemed any likelihood of WP7 devices selling in these vast quantities):

103,600,000 * $24 = $2,486,400,000

Let's then divide that by the number of Symbian developers NOKIA employs so we get an annual cost per developer:

$2,486,400,000 / 6,000 = $414,400

So NOKIA would only make a saving from this plan of action if the average annual cost of employing each Symbian developer was greater than $414,000.

Mmm... do you think that's likely?

And we were being conservative! If the number employed in the Symbian team was at the lower end of the spectrum and the license fee is at the upper end then we would only be talking about making a saving if the average annual cost of employing each Symbian developer was greater than $1,105,067 per annum!

Then of course you need to start factoring in the increased hardware costs because WP7 is much more demanding on resources than Symbian and it supports a much narrower range of components.

You also have to consider the loss of control, M$ developers are not directly employed by NOKIA and so their priorities will not always be the same as NOKIA's priorities.

It seems very clear to me that every single thing Elop has done has been to the benefit of M$ and to the detriment of NOKIA.
1. Nokia has better contract with ms than zte
2. You forgot the scenario that nokias smartphone platform dies (symbian/wp) and they want to stay alive as pure service company. Symbian = certain default, wp = stop making phones and paying from os development
3. Nokias priorities are their services on top of wp (in west), wheres the problem?
4. Increased hw costs are temporary, have you ignored every piece of news from wp camp?

sihg...maybe this is enough for this thread. At least for me.

I beg everyone to research themselves instead of believing everything symbian fanboy say. And naturally everyone should take my writings with a grain of salt or find the sources themselves.
__________________
Want to know something?
K.I.S.S. approach:
wiki category:beginners. Browse it through and you'll be much wiser!
If the link doesn't help, just use
Google Custom Search
 
Posts: 457 | Thanked: 598 times | Joined on Jan 2010
#347
^

We know the nokia board doesn't care about platforms. In fact it hates them and just wants to pass the time until platforms become irrelevant. In that respect they are actually far ahead of their time. It could happen faster than we think though. E.g. platform independent cloud gaming will make consoles obsolete soon.

In that respect their strategy to focus on the low-end with native Qt is the right thing to do.

Problem is right now platforms still matter, and I am not sure wp was the right horse to bet on.
 
Posts: 470 | Thanked: 399 times | Joined on Jul 2011 @ Croatia
#348
Originally Posted by Rugoz View Post
^

We know the nokia board doesn't care about platforms. In fact it hates them and just wants to pass the time until platforms become irrelevant. In that respect they are actually far ahead of their time. It could happen faster than we think though. E.g. platform independent cloud gaming will make consoles obsolete soon.

In that respect their strategy to focus on the low-end with native Qt is the right thing to do.

Problem is right now platforms still matter, and I am not sure wp was the right horse to bet on.
oh, yeah, cloud, cant wait...
id like to se you play those great games when you dont haz your internetz (weak network signal or some other reason...)
not to mention considerable lag no matter how close to server you are...
 
Posts: 1,523 | Thanked: 1,997 times | Joined on Jul 2011 @ not your mom's FOSS basement
#349
Originally Posted by Rugoz View Post
E.g. platform independent cloud gaming will make consoles obsolete soon.
...

I just created Web 4.0, it's all magic. The cloud is gone in Web 4.0. It has become a fog. Go to the fog. It will really obscure your view of anything real.
True words.
 
Posts: 457 | Thanked: 598 times | Joined on Jan 2010
#350
oh, yeah, cloud, cant wait...
id like to se you play those great games when you dont haz your internetz (weak network signal or some other reason...)
not to mention considerable lag no matter how close to server you are...
One reason I am saying this is because Crytek just announced their own cloud gaming platform, currently still beta (its called GFace). They investigated cloud gaming some time ago but now they obviously think the infrastructure will be ready within 2-3 years. Never underestimate tech. progress.
 
Reply

Tags
blame others, deluded fanboys, kidsbeingkids, lumiadork, ms will die, salesdroids, the elop flop, wp blows

Thread Tools

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:30.