> changed their whole strategy, focus and expertise in less than 5 years, simply impossible for a company that size
Microsoft was bigger than Nokia when, between 1993-2000, they executed several changes of greater magnitude in less than 5 years each (Windows 3, the response to Netscape, Windows NT).
> The problem with Nokia and Android is that Samsung will always, in every single case, have cheaper and more powerful devices. Maybe Nokia could've keep themselves in the game with a lot of marketing and a bit of luck, but eventually, down the road, Samsung would take over
Why? Samsung has only this year started showing small signs of becoming something more than a "fast follower". Nokia used to know how to lead the market... if they still did, they would have no trouble innovating to stay on top of Samsung.
Microsoft was bigger than Nokia when, between 1993-2000, they executed several changes of greater magnitude in less than 5 years each (Windows 3, the response to Netscape, Windows NT).
> The problem with Nokia and Android is that Samsung will always, in every single case, have cheaper and more powerful devices. Maybe Nokia could've keep themselves in the game with a lot of marketing and a bit of luck, but eventually, down the road, Samsung would take over
Why? Samsung has only this year started showing small signs of becoming something more than a "fast follower". Nokia used to know how to lead the market... if they still did, they would have no trouble innovating to stay on top of Samsung.