ie8 fix
madison

Hardware 2.0

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

How much did Microsoft pay Nokia NOT to choose Android? How about a cool $1 billion!

By | March 7, 2011, 2:32pm PST

Summary: According to Bloomberg, Microsoft will pay Nokia more than $1 billion to promote and develop Windows Phone-based handsets.

According to Bloomberg, Microsoft will pay Nokia more than $1 billion to promote and develop Windows Phone-based handsets.

The agreement for the more than billion-dollar payment was part of a campaign by Microsoft to keep Nokia from choosing Google’s Android operating system, one of the people said. Nokia also opted for Microsoft because Windows Phone software, which is newer than Android and has a smaller number of handsets for sale, gives Nokia a better chance to stand out, one of the people said.

You read that right - $1 billion. That’s how much Microsoft wanted to avoid Nokia going with Android. And given the numbers involved, it seems that Microsoft really was desperate to prevent Nokia from adding to the ever-growing popularity of Google’s open source platform.

No wonder Nokia was ready not only abandon its own Symbian platform, but also shun Android and go exclusively with Windows Phone. While Nokia has been at pains to emphasize that Windows Phone will be its primary smartphone platform, but it’s hard to see Symbian lasting long given the competition, so it’s fair to say that Nokia has turned itself exclusively into a Microsoft OEM. And that’s an unusual thing for a smartphone maker. While LG, Samsung and HTC and so on have Android and Windows Phone (and a smattering of other smaller operating systems such as Bada and Brew), Nokia is betting the farm entirely on Microsoft and Windows Phone.

But for a $1 billion, I think that in the short term at least, Nokia can afford to.

What do you think? Will this gamble pay off for Nokia? Is Microsoft really that scared of Android?

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology.

Disclosure

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

All opinions expressed on Hardware 2.0 are those of Adrian Kingsley-Hughes. Every effort is made to ensure that the information posted is accurate. If you have any comments, queries or corrections, please contact Adrian via the email link here. Any possible conflicts of interest will be posted below. [Updated: February 23, 2010] - Adrian Kingsley-Hughes has no business relationships, affiliations, investments, or other actual/potential conflicts of interest relating to the content posted so far on this blog.

Biography

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology -- whether that be by learning to program, building a PC from a pile of parts, or helping them get the most from their new MP3 player or digital camera.

Adrian has authored/co-authored technical books on a variety of topics, ranging from programming to building and maintaining PCs. His most recent books include "Build the Ultimate Custom PC", "Beginning Programming" and "The PC Doctor's Fix It Yourself Guide". He has also written training manuals that have been used by a number of Fortune 500 companies.

Adrian also runs a popular blog under the name The PC Doctor, where he covers a range of computer-related topics -- from security to repairing and upgrading.

119
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: How much did Microsoft pay Nokia NOT to choose Android? How about a cool $1 billion!
alanhawk 21st Sep
It's a no brainer for ms to pick that up in trade for WP licenses. Woodfield High School | Woodfield University
I thought it was supposed to be the other way... I use your software, I pay you. Not, I use your software, you pay me.
paying out huge amounts of money. Pretty hilarious really. And, they are still losing market share.
@DonnieBoy
So Google were going to give Android away to Nokia?

Really?
@DonnieBoy

Hmmm. So they decided not to go with a multi versioned, buggy phone OS developed by an advertising company based on a cut-down 1990s OS . How much would Google have to pay to get over those hurdles?

They were probably offering 2 billion wink
offered Nokia the normal engineering help that they give to the manufacturers, nothing more. As the market results show, people do NOT like MS mobile operating systems. They are losing share faster than expected.
Nothing deparate or funny. Nokia has local mapping and ad services ms wants and lots of valuable patents. It's a no brainer for ms to pick that up in trade for WP licenses.
hurting Nokia. The 1B to do the deal does not look so good anymore.
@DonnieBoy
I guess there is a real fear in Googleland if they where there offering tons of money and "experts", too.

That's what I think is pretty hilarious really.
It would show that Google is really worried about WP7 being adopted on competing phones.

Otherwise they would have never flown up there to talk to Nokia face to face, right.

And no Google is a business, run by businessmen, so your "next" statement about them doing it to "mess with MS" will come of sounding just as ridiculous as when you said it before.
@DonnieBoy Um, I think they just bought market share. Time will tell as to whether it works out for them. They still probably make more money on Halo than RedHat makes. One of the few pure-play open source software houses.
MS does need to lead out and quit trying to co-opt markets - after the fact. It is too expensive and takes too long.
@DonnieBoy They are losing market share because they haven't really done anything for a while. This is doing something. Time will tell, if it was a good choice. WP7 appears to be decent but it takes a while to reverse a downhill slide.
@dazzlingd
As a matter of fact: yes, Google would have handed Nokia legal permission to access the Android source code, and permission to incorporate the compiled Android code in any devices Nokia manufactured, for no fee. As a matter of fact, everybody has that same permission. That's one of the consequences of Google's open source licensing model.

Now, if Nokia had wanted to engage Google's engineers to provide technical support in adapting the software to work well on Nokia's hardware and to customize the user interface to meed Nokia's needs, then Google would likely have charged Nokia for providing that technical support.

But the operating system itself: no fee for any manufacturer to adopt it.
And that?s an unusual thing for a smartphone maker. While LG, Samsung and HTC and so on have Android and Windows Phone (and a smattering of other smaller operating systems such as Bada and Brew), Nokia is betting the farm entirely on Microsoft and Windows Phone. book report writing
Dissertation Writing
Thesis Writing
Book Report Writing
Custom Admission Essay
Thanks for sharing this information, keep up the good work. Woodfield High School | Woodfield University
It's a no brainer for ms to pick that up in trade for WP licenses. Woodfield High School | Woodfield University
@tatiGmail

As WP7 is so awful they have to.
@tatiGmail Yes and no. I mean do you think that all those Macbooks and iPhones you see people use in movies are things Hollywood buys? Of course not. They would buy an empty shell of a case if it came out of their own pockets. But sometimes in business you need to spend money to make money. Microsoft is in a rough spot with Android and iOS completely dominating the market and they needed to do something aggressive to penetrate that market. Nokia, like them or not, have been a major player in the cell phone world since the beginning. So the partnership is probably not a bad one. If Microsoft spends $1 billion to make $10 billion, its not a bad deal. (and no, I'm not saying that is how it will all go down...but it could)
@tatiGmail I can clearly see how desperate Microsoft is if they plan to pay 1 billion dollars just for not choosing android.
reverse cell lookup
Its a great deal for both of them. Microsoft will easily make up that $1bill in revenue once the Nokia phones are released. What is sad is the spin to try to make it sound like Microsoft didn't want them to go with android, its more like both companies knew better than to go with android for reasons that have been stated previously.
@Loverock Davidson - Which Microsoft PR firm do you work for?

Android = Winner
Windows Phone 7 = loser

It would be logical for Nokia to go with the winner. The fact that it chose the loser, makes it obvious that Microsoft paid Nokia to avoid Android.
@zndac This particular fallacy of logic is known as "Begging the Question".
@Loverock Davidson

How will MS make that back?

So far they have already spent $500M to develop WP7. Now they are paying another $1000M to Nokia. Total tab = $1.5B.

Apple just sold its 100M iphone. Based on the expected $15/unit WP7 license, that means WP7 will also need to sell 100M units to just break even.

Will WP7 be as popular as the iphone? So far, its not even close.

How is MS going to make a profit on this?
0 Votes
+ -
The same way Android makes money
Michael Alan Goff 8th Mar 2011
Aside from licenses, there is also the app market. If there are 20 million people actually buying apps, they'll be making money in the long run.
@Loverock Davidson

Yep

Reason #1: Fragmentation

Reason #2: Malware...just look at THE App Market's 50 malware infections....it was not some pirated third party App store this time...but the OFFICIAL one.....that sealed the deal for me on which tablet I'm going to be buying....it won't be Android based.

Reason #3: Google made it, therefore it is all spyware.
@Loverock Davidson Why wouldnt M$ not want them to go with android? no one else seems to adopting wp7 en masse, so it was in M$ best interest to convince them not to use android and use wp7, personally I think it will fail miserably, ( i hope it doesnt, anything that cuts into Apples profits makes me smile a bit) but M$ has never been good in the mobile market, and Nokia hasnt released anything mind blowing in over a decade,
@Loverock Davidson - especially when that anti-ms anythong comes from AK-H, although nothing less than sensationalism and highly misleading headlines seem to be his stock in trade. I thought zdnet would adhere more tightly with accepted journalism practices. Apparently, they want to become the Fox News of tech reporting.
@Loverock Davidson

What you call spin seems obvious to everyone else, but hey you might be right. Please, tell us YOUR version of how Nokia bent Microsoft over a barrell to the tune of $1B.
0 Votes
+ -
It really was the smart move on both parts.
matthew_maurice 7th Mar 2011
Nokia would have been just another Android OEM, and Microsoft would have been stuck with the same mediocre handset makers (that pre-update problem was pretty squarely on Samsung's shoulders). The idea of Nokia handsets taking advantage of lower-level WP7 integration than the other guys have does have some merit. Besides, HTC is paying MS a license on both the WP7 and Android devices it sells, so part of that $1 Billion is coming from them. I'm sure they're just thrilled with that little nugget of information.
the LOSING operating system. Really just shows you how desperate MS was in mobile, and how deep their pockets are from monopoly profits. Well, also how desperate Nokia was as well.
0 Votes
+ -
@DonnieBoy And they invested accordingly. Sounds like a great deal for the Nokia employees.

And stop with the monopoly profits nonsense. MS cant force anybody to buy their products. Remember Vista?
as usual. With the market share results, we can see that Microsoft must be very desperate after they realized that WP7 was failing.
@DonnieBoy
You haven't answered that question yet. You keep saying MS did that. but you've totally sidestepped the fact that Google offered Nokia the same deal.

Why is that?
0 Votes
+ -
WP7 failing? In what way, Donnieboy?
Will Farrell 8th Mar 2011
@DonnieBoy
All I see is that it's been out for a total of 3 or 4 months, vs iPhone and Android a total of 3 to 4 years.

In that time both phones have been out on the top 2 carriers, WP7 on just AT&T in GSM.

So how is that failing? Because us Verizon users haven't had the chance to purchase it yet?

Why do you think Apple was in such a rush to get the iPhone onto Verizon a full year ahead of the planned schedule?

I know, you'll say what ever it takes, to scared to face facts. No big deal, we know what your kind is like.
@DonnieBoy Paying someone to use your OS, when you have an app store to make money off of IS good business, thats why Google doesnt charge anyone to use Android, they know they will make it back when that user buys 10 or 15 apps a year, I think it was a good investment for M$, I dont think its going to save the M$ mobile platform, and will probably bury nokia, I hope not, I would really like to see it cut in apples market share personally but I dont see that happening unless M$ and nokia get together on something mind blowing...
@matthew_maurice Your argument, that this is a unique smart move by Nokia that distinguishes them from others, would be the same if Nokia bought Word Perfect 7 instead of Windows Phone 7. Your argument that they take advantage of lower-level WP7 integration: what are the minimum specs of WP7? Does Nokia actually make any phones that fulfil those specs? Do you think WP7 would run well on Nokia hardware? Remember, they're market leader on cheap & cheerful phones for the large part of the world that's not the rich west. AFAIK, Android and Maemo and Meego compile to native binaries, therefore that delivers best performance and that means cheaper CPUs can run it "well enough".
0 Votes
+ -
Yes it's a good move
oncall 7th Mar 2011
Microsoft needed a cell phone manufacturer committeed to moving its plaform forward and Nokia needed a platform to distinguish itself from the army of Asian handset makers.
distinction you want. And, if Microsoft can only get manufacturers to use their OS by paying out huge sums of money, something is terribly wrong.
0 Votes
+ -
Microsoft is paying
oncall 7th Mar 2011
@DonnieBoy

For being late to the party. A billion for exclusivity on a leading handset maker, not a bad trade. Nokia gets a billion dollar committment from Microsoft to stand behind what it sells. How long has Google been around? Not long enough to bet ones company on. As far as Android goes, it's got its own problems that come for "free" like the OS does, doesn't it? Declaring Android the "winner" is a little premature, IMHO, as there is still well over 50% of the market not using a smartphone.
mobile much longer than either Apple or Google. The are not paying for being late to the party, they are paying because they have been an utter failure and do not know what else to do.
0 Votes
+ -
Fair enough
oncall Updated - 7th Mar 2011
@DonnieBoy

Yes being there early and failing surely would make a company think twice about persuing the same course. Thank goodness Apple didn't listen to all the idiots who said "Tablets?! Tried and failed". I personally think Google is enjoying a temporary high brought about by awesome timing in it's delivery of a free OS that budget handset makers were craving, you just can't beat free. Of course being free Google is under no constraints to ever show a profit from Android nor are they under any constraints to continue supporting if Google finds something better to do.

Personally I think Nokia made the right choice going with a 30+ year software maker over a advertising company has been a publically traded company for slightly longer than the xbox 360 has been around.
though they are getting a big payout. From market results, people much prefer Android, and are turning their nose up at WP7. Even WinMo users are not upgrading to WP7. So, Nokia could find itself competing with an OS that people do not want. Nokia should have gone with both operating systems and let customers decide.
@DonnieBoy
No body wants to go with a loser, and that's all Android would have made Nokia, a has been.

At least they have a future now.

Oh, the stock would have dropped even if they went with Android, from what I have been reading and hearing.
@DonnieBoy They are not only paying for the OS. There is much more to the deal than that.
0 Votes
+ -
Adrian Kingsley-Hughes = Troll
JABBER_WOLF 7th Mar 2011
If thats the case Android was at the table trying to do the same thing.
How much was Android trying to pay Nokia not to use Wp7 ?! Hmmm?!

And more to the point, why was Google so afraid that they needed to be at the table? The fear was in Google's hearts not MS. I mean seriously Google should have nothing to fear but apparently it did.

Andrian - maybe you should try writing a balanced article for once. Just for fun, try it !
And, Nokia was ready to go with Android, but, pretty hard to turn down a cool billion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@DonnieBoy

You seem to be posting a lot on this subject. Are you bothered that much that Nokia took the money, or that MS spent it, or just worried?
0 Votes
+ -
Nokia wasn't ready to go with Android.
Will Farrell 8th Mar 2011
@DonnieBoy
From what I heard they wanted no one's help but the writing was on the wall, Google rushed in, but their offer fell short and MS made the more compelling offer/deal.

Nokia DID NOT want to go with Android.
0 Votes
+ -
14 times already
Will Farrell 8th Mar 2011
@Badgered
Yup, I counted. From what I've learned is that the more Donnieboy posts, the more worried he is.

This would mean that Nokia made the right choice if it pisses this guy off to such a degree.

I really do get a laugh out of whatching him make a fool out of himself like it was some big Google victory.

Al I see is that Google offered to pay Nokia to use Android, something they haven't done with other companies.

Or did they? I'm starting to wonder if Google actually paid other cell carriers use Android? It would make sense, maybe something to look into.

I would start with Motorola.
@Will Farrell
Google is a public company. Go read their report, if they paid someone to use Android- come and tell. Otherwise you are vaporware.
@ Will Farrell

As I understand it, Google's strategy with Android is to indirectly pay the mobile operators to use it, by allowing them to take the non-developer share of app revenue. Whereas Apple and Microsoft each take a 30 per cent cut of app revenue from the App Store and Windows Phone Marketplace, respectively, the 30 per cent of revenue from the Android Market that doesn't go to app developers goes to the mobile operators (after subtracting transaction costs).

Effectively paying their app revenue share to the operators was certainly a clever way of making Android attractive to mobile operators, who after all are the ones who decide which mobile phones to buy and to push. At the same time, the fact that Android and the Android Market are effectively drains on resources for Google means that the incentives to run them well are weak. Apple and Microsoft have direct incentives to ensure quality apps are offered, because they take a share of the potentially substantial revenue streams. Google have no such incentives, and it shows.

Over time, mobile operators may become less excited about Android, if it leads to a proliferation of bandwidth-consuming malware and poor customer satisfaction. Apple offer products that consumers want, so don't have to rely on operators pushing them. The key for Microsoft is to do the same, and it sounds like they're making progress in that direction. I haven't used a Windows Phone, and may wait for Nokia's offerings before trying one, but what I've heard has been good.

Google are making a bet that, like the PC market in the 80s/90s, the key to becoming the dominant mobile OS will be achieving an early lead in the installed base to attract developers, who will write apps that attract users and so on, in a virtuous circle. I'm not so sure this applies to mobiles the way it did to PCs. Mobile apps are relatively simple, relatively easy to port and cheap to distribute. Right now, Android looks set to become, at best, the next Symbian, not the next Windows.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
Click Here
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix