CNN has a post on Nokia and how it changed mobile. Sure, when I watched Keanu Reeves and Lawrence Fishburne whipped out their Nokia phones and them dark glasses, I wanted both. But that was then. Waaaay back then. This is 2013 and, officially, Nokia is not more as a mobile concern.
While CNN's post regarding Nokia's role in mobile phones has a few valid points, the article as a whole seemed very stretched. You can say the same thing about any other companies in the 2000s.
The article begged the reader to conclude only one thing: Nokia messed up big: first when Blackberry came to dominate the smartphone market and no one else had an answer and in 2007 when the iPhone changed the whole mobile landscape. You can't say that this was Nokia's fault alone. As Motorola, Blackberry, and Palm. Motorola, the best known brand in cell along side Nokia, had its RAZR moment but then nothing. It's on life support because its daddy is a 800-lb search giant.
Some day, such posts may well be written about Apple, Samsung, or Microsoft. Even Google. But what's the relevance of such posts? If anything, it's the worst kind of obituary. This shows why tech journalism should be left to bloggers with industry immersion and years of experience, not mass media that has very little clue what's going on in tech, social, or mobile.
No comments:
Post a Comment