It jives extremely well with a lot of traditional business management especially in hardware and telecoms oriented companies. It's a top down approach which satisfies the needs of the business development people first.
Nokia grew up in a world where the network operator was king and put complex and intrusive demands on the handset vendors, you still see this effect today.
If you look back further in his blog you'll see how he was perplexed that the original iPhone appeared so lacking in the bullet point features vs S60/Symbian.
Nokia employed a whole horde of business guys and product managers to slap these features on to OS so they could sell the platform, but simultaneously neglected the intrinsics that make an OS 'good'.
If you look at the history of Symbian, especially articles on The Register you'll see that this problem was actually well understood inside engineering. There were several points throughout the years where things could have been different. Elop rolled the dice, but cannibalized his own company at the same time. Steve Jobs 2.0 obviously didn't.
FYI, to both you and shinratdr, the word is jibe. It jibes extremely well with a lot of traditional business management. Jive is a dance and a manner of speaking.
Interesting, maybe it's because I'm English, it felt like the right expression.
"The British Oxford English Dictionary flags jibe in the sense of “to agree with” as “chiefly U.S.” Unlike Merriam-Webster, however, the OED includes this definition under the word jive:
b. intr. To make sense; to fit in. U.S. Cf JIBE v."
Nokia grew up in a world where the network operator was king and put complex and intrusive demands on the handset vendors, you still see this effect today.
If you look back further in his blog you'll see how he was perplexed that the original iPhone appeared so lacking in the bullet point features vs S60/Symbian.
Nokia employed a whole horde of business guys and product managers to slap these features on to OS so they could sell the platform, but simultaneously neglected the intrinsics that make an OS 'good'.
If you look at the history of Symbian, especially articles on The Register you'll see that this problem was actually well understood inside engineering. There were several points throughout the years where things could have been different. Elop rolled the dice, but cannibalized his own company at the same time. Steve Jobs 2.0 obviously didn't.