I enjoyed Ahonen’s analysis of the mobile market until it seemed that he turned a little sour. It wasn’t because he was now simply against the Nokia that I love. It was because in my opinion, he was using facts and numbers but twisting them to get the outcome on his new agenda. Conclusions can often be completely different based on the same identical correct set of events. For example, this:
And it gets worse when malformed conclusions are reported as unquestioned gospel.
It’s difficult to counter for many reasons. Firstly, if you try and do so directly on his blog, criticisms will be removed. Secondly, because it’s hard to keep up with those tends of thousand of word posts to begin with. It wouldn’t be fair to Ahonen not to read his full post and get my conclusion based on its entirety. But the sheer size and frequency of large blog posts makes this a rather time consuming task, and as you know, I’m already very much limited on time with what I do on this hobby blog and real life.
Further more, it’s just drama I’d rather avoid (relentless negativity and confrontation) plus feeling of futility that you cannot separate a determined man from his agenda.
Actually, I wasn’t even going to highlight this but I keep getting mails to do so. Plus, what with all the Nokia bashing, it may be good to have a different perspective on things.
I have no idea who this person is, or why we should be paying any more attention to him than Ahonen. For some reason they’ve set up a blog which aims to precisely do what I wanted to do but no longer have the energy or desire to do so: go through Ahonen’s pieces to point out anomalies, inconsistencies, misinformation etc.
The author is also Ex Nokian, a Finnish ex Nokia guy as indicated by his Finnish tweets (though he could be of any nationality and a Finnish speaker). He’s an engineer in fact. His aim is to address invalid statements by Ahonen. Without taking this ExNokian’s own words for gospel either, feel free to go through his rebuttals should they also be erroneous.
Ahonen is aware of this guy. He brands ‘ex Nokian’ as a troll, making sure no one pays attention by defacing Ex Nokian’s character as someone who just wants traffic for their blog, using Ahonen’s name to get exposure. Has he got a personal beef with Ahonen? Is Ex Nokian’s conclusions about Ahonen also equally clouded? See for yourself in the many posts he’s done (should you have the time to do so). Their blog is relatively new, with archives from June 2012.
Ahonen says “Ex Nokian” is untrustworthy because he blogs anonymously.
There are many reasons to blog anonymously/under a pseudonym etc. I wouldn’t say that makes anyone instantly untrustworthy. Their actions and content under that anonymity will indicate if they are or aren’t trustworthy. Or is the value of a comment only worth who says it in the first place, not what is actually being said?
Ex Nokian explains here: http://dominiescommunicate.wordpress.com/about/who-is-anonymous-ex-nokian/
Note, unlike Ahonen, here we do NOT remove comments of any sort other than spam. Share your opinion, but do so maturely. Keep personal attacks to a zero. Stay relevant to the topic. Address the topic of conversation not the character of the person you’re discussing it with.
Thanks everyone for the tip.