[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by carboy

... This is the dollar figures of some ...

Was talking about US Govt. Would be nice to know which of these and how much of those are used - in departments for which Blackberry was originally designed for.

BTW, which of these qualify to be called "an original MS product"? Nah, don't bother, forget I asked.

[carboy]

Originally Posted by DerAlte

Was talking about US Govt. Would be nice to know which of these and how much of those are used - in departments for which Blackberry was originally designed for.

I am betting all of those are used in the US Govt and lots of it also - if you know otherwise please put forth the data. Microsoft does loads of business with the US Govt - billions and billions. As far as I know, the blackberry wasn't designed for the Govt.

[deepaktpatil]

Originally Posted by Steeroid

The handset business is only a division of Nokia - they are first and foremost an engineering company that is a network equipment vendor and lately a managed services provider. Nokia has in the past built satellites, receivers etc - the fact that we only see their name on cellphones does not mean that is their entire business.

In fact Nokia started with producing paper pulp, then went on to produce electricity, rubber, tyres, boots etc before getting into communications equipments. It sold all other businesses around 1992 and started concentrating on mobile phones and network equipment. Even now you can get Nokia boots although they are manufactured by somebody else.

[F150]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Most people think that the only salvation for Nokia would have been Android. But I disagree.
Before Elop, Nokia made a phone called N900. There was nothing in the market which even came close to that device.
Yes, Nokia had been whipped, and share price was dropping.
But tech giant intel was willing to sign in on meego development, and take up on the hardware front.
Elop joined, and a clear road map ahead was destroyed.
Even when nokia share price crashed, N900 etc., were selling in the open market at a price higher than the launch price, often commanding 20-30% premium.
Nokia was at the bottom, but the road ahead was bright. With meego and linux based arcitechture it was making a comeback.
Low end market was always Nokia's and if they had gone ahead with intel plans, you would have had a phone which would shame todays phones in 2012.
Every analysit and tech writer was waiting for the challenger to android and iPhone.
Sure US market was hard to crack, but the world was there for Nokia's taking. All of a sudden a new CEO comes, and devalues the company and then his previous company buys it.
If that is not a Trojan horse, I don't know what is.

Yes, poor decision by NOKIA back then, now they have been swallowed. NOKIA has tremendous brand recall, they should have gone ahead with Meego plans.

[msdivy]

Originally Posted by pahwa

I seriously hope Microsoft is not even remotely thinking of acquiring BlackBerry. That would be an outright failure!

Why would it be a failure? Currently Blackberry is worth around $5.5 billion and its patent portfolio itself will make up 85~90% of this value. Companies are hoping that Blackberry will sink further and buy for less.

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by carboy

I am betting all of those are used in the US Govt and lots of it also ...

So you don't have the data? I though you might, the way you quoted numbers. Forget it. There are a lot of other sadnesses in this era (loosely translated from Urdu). Peace!

Originally Posted by carboy

... As far as I know, the blackberry wasn't designed for the Govt.

Ever wonder why their C++ API is not publicly available outside US & Canada, even though it very much exists and is current? It is not because Java is a better language and can produce portable programs.

[carboy]

Originally Posted by DerAlte

So you don't have the data? I though you might, the way you quoted numbers.

You still haven't provided any data for your claim "MS is limited to the computers on secretaries' desks". You started making claims - why don't you prove it.

Originally Posted by DerAlte

Ever wonder why their C++ API is not publicly available outside US & Canada, even though it very much exists and is current? It is not because Java is a better language and can produce portable programs.

I really don't understand what you are on about.

https://developer.blackberry.com/dev...hoice/ndk.html

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by carboy

You still haven't provided any data for your claim "MS is limited to the computers on secretaries' desks". You started making claims - why don't you prove it. ...

@carboy, I wrote a figurative expression, not a 'claim'. You wrote about 'billions' - data - so I thought you might have access to numbers deeper than summary level.

Every conversation doesn't have to deteriorate to a confrontation to prove your point. It is unpleasant - please avoid that.

Originally Posted by carboy

... I really don't understand what you are on about. ...

If you go deeper a couple of levels, you will understand. 'Sales' brochures don't always convey everything.

Initially, the BB C++ API, with mil standard encryption etc., was kept out of reach of anyone outside US & Canada - because of conflict of interest with US Govt. requirements. Anyone living in US or Canada (with requisite DoD clearance if non-citizens) could get access to it, but not if one is in India, Europe etc. Everyone outside this closed circle had to use the Java API. The current C++ API in that link still excludes such critical functionality.

Before BB became widely available to public, it was made for US Govt. agencies, including the US President. Those pieces were loosely the same that you or I got, but not exactly.

[carboy]

Originally Posted by DerAlte

@carboy, I wrote a figurative expression, not a 'claim'. You wrote about 'billions' - data - so I thought you might have access to numbers deeper than summary level.

Every conversation doesn't have to deteriorate to a confrontation to prove your point. It is unpleasant - please avoid that.

I don't think I was anymore confrontational than you. You were dismissive much before me. Anyway, peace.

Originally Posted by DerAlte

If you go deeper a couple of levels, you will understand. 'Sales' brochures don't always convey everything.

Initially, the BB C++ API, with mil standard encryption etc., was kept out of reach of anyone outside US & Canada - because of conflict of interest with US Govt. requirements.

I doubt if this was anything specific to BB. US has long had a rule that Symmetric Cryptography having a key length of more than 64 bits could not be exported. If I remember correctly, this was implemented under Clinton in the 90s. 64 bit is easily broken by a brute force attack.
Anyway, lots of companies (including Microsoft) give special builds for big/special customers. I am not at all sure how it's relevant.

Originally Posted by DerAlte

Anyone living in US or Canada (with requisite DoD clearance if non-citizens) could get access to it, but not if one is in India, Europe etc. Everyone outside this closed circle had to use the Java API. The current C++ API in that link still excludes such critical functionality.

Do you have a cite for any of this?

Originally Posted by DerAlte

Before BB became widely available to public, it was made for US Govt. agencies, including the US President. Those pieces were loosely the same that you or I got, but not exactly.

The US president got the BB after it became popular. He may have got a special build - but as I said this is routinely done by a lot of companies for Govt, Military and big/special customers.

For eg. I was talking to an Indian military vendor about one of my company's products recently. They wanted a private build with a minor tweak to thestandard cryptographic algorithms in our product. I am sure we will oblige them if the order value is big enough.

Anyway, over all in cryptography, the security comes through how good the algorithm is and the key length. Keeping the algorithm secret ranks much lesser in importance as far as security goes. Almost every widely used and strong cryptographic algorithm is published and not a secret.

[abirnale]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

"Embrace and extinguish"
.....
So top guy leaves Microsoft. Joins another company. Takes some decisions which cause the share price to plummet, and then his former company buys the current company. Trojan Horse anyone?

Originally Posted by Mr_Bean

Nokia has been seriously under valued here. Look at Skype, it was brought by Microsoft for $8.5 billion in May 2011

Honestly, I thought of this first time I heard that Elop was taking over Nokia. Now when I connect the dots looking backwards, this feeling grows stronger. Of course, we (the commoner/ users and not shareholders) have nothing to do with it formally, cant prove as well. The only sad part is, Nokia is once cherished and loved brand might see the same fate as Palm. Remember Palm - the first wide know PDA maker disappeared in thin with HP taking it over? Other than the patents, probably HP couldn't make anything out of that deal. The problem with Palm was that it did not wake up right in time for the smartphone revolution and had no choice probably. But with Nokia, din't they have some?

Hope "Palm" does not happen with Nokia. But even if it does we may only limit to quoting batter to have life, right?

The difficult part to digest for Nokia and its shareholders would be why they ditched Symbian if not embraced Android. And although Android could make a great companion for Nokia, its very own OS - Symbian could have helped it too.

Only time will tell how MS can revive Nokia and its own Windows Phone OS or both will continue to act like third front group in Indian politics that hardly makes it to central power!

Another interesting piece of information is - we now have another emerging fighter to cherish for - Micromax. They have been working very hard to even surpass Samsung by this Diwali and I feel they will - news link here. According to IDC figures for Q2 of 2013, Micromax stayed at No 2 spot and crossed the 2 million units mark in shipments.

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by carboy

... You were dismissive much before me. ...

Of whom? MS? Why would that irk you?

Originally Posted by carboy

... Do you have a cite for any of this? ...

No, I don't - since that would violate conditions of employment agreement(s). Doesn't matter whether you and I believe it or not.

Originally Posted by carboy

... The US president got the BB after it became popular. He may have got a special build - but as I said this is routinely done by a lot of companies for Govt, Military and big/special customers. ...

Or could it be that since the US President got it, it increased the popularity for others? What you say is true - IF it is a product to be adapted for a company. The US Govt. agencies do it slightly differently - it is made to certain requirements. It was not only about algorithms and xx bit encryption. It was a totally separate communication channel. Even if you knew the President's BB PIN, your message wouldn't reach him.

Anyhow, let's get back to Nokia device business being taken over by MS, shall we?

[carboy]

Originally Posted by DerAlte

Of whom? MS? Why would that irk you?

No - about what I wrote. I am pretty sure MS sells billions of dollars of stuff to the US govt which is not used by secretaries.

Originally Posted by DerAlte

Or could it be that since the US President got it, it increased the popularity for others?

Obama became the president after the Blackberry became popular. And Bush did not have a BB when he was the president.

Originally Posted by DerAlte

What you say is true - IF it is a product to be adapted for a company. The US Govt. agencies do it slightly differently - it is made to certain requirements. It was not only about algorithms and xx bit encryption. It was a totally separate communication channel. Even if you knew the President's BB PIN, your message wouldn't reach him.

Sure - but that doesn't mean BB was designed for the US govt - they customized and created a separate channel for the President. I bet the US Govt paid a lot for this. And if I pay the same, I think RIM would set up a separate channel for me also.

BB became popular in the US corporate world before it became popular amongst senators and govt.

[srishiva]

Originally Posted by carboy

No - about what I wrote. I am pretty sure MS sells billions of dollars of stuff to the US govt which is not used by secretaries.

Obama became the president after the Blackberry became popular. And Bush did not have a BB when he was the president.

I agree, I still remember the candidate Obama's likening for the BB much before he was President and how he couldn't let it go. The agencies then made sure it had no holes after he became President.

It was a fashion to criticise MS before, then Apple was also added and it will go on against incumbents.

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by veyron_head

... I was wondering why MS did not look at Blackberry for acquisition. ...

Originally Posted by DerAlte

... MS is limited to the computers on secretaries' desks.

Originally Posted by carboy

This is the dollar figures of some MS software not found on secretaries desks. ...

Originally Posted by carboy

No - about what I wrote ...

Huh? Do you also write as @veyron_head? If not, I cannot understand the consternation, since my statement was connected to veyron_head's post (quoted in my original post). Then you wrote about 'billions of dollars', and ... What gives???

Anyhow, we are seriously OT here. I'll just consider this as a blip that shouldn't have been.

[msdivy]

This article probably gets its right on where Nokia failed - http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...ent-wrong.html

In retrospect, Nokia might have gone to Android or Meego. But the fact is Nokia is (still) a spectacular hardware company but failed to recognize the importance of software.

When the world was moving towards simple & minimalistic design, Nokia packed their phone with myriad (tiny) buttons, which confused the user (buttons like push2talk, camera launch, music launch, delete text, etc, all in 1 phone). User interface of Symbian was poor. Simple tasks required opening multiple windows. Symbian had great productivity tools, but unusable in 1x1 inch display.