> most of Nokia's brand loyalty is because of the indestructible and unbelievably reliable phones they made in the 90's, since then they've been steadily dropping on that front
Nokia phones are still the most reliable and solid, by far... for now.
Really? Here in Norway, people are complaining constantly about a few Nokia models that are notorious for bad reliability, and I've never heard complaints about iPhones, for example.
If Nokia phones are actually "the most reliable and solid, by far", they've got a serious perception problem in the marketplace, at least in these parts.
I don't buy phones everyday, so maybe the most recent models are weaker, but I have a Nokia from 2009, and so does my wife. Our kids have taken them to the most incredible abuse imaginable and they're still working fine.
I had Sony phones, Samsung phones, all very fragile and sensitive to dust, water, being stepped upon, etc.
We don't have iPhones but we have iPads (which are a different beast altogether, of course)... the fist iPad to enter our home lasted exactly one day (it doesn't like being dropped from a table -- even a low table).
I would like to see statistical information how people perceive reliability of their phones. I have 3 years old Nokia smartphone and I'm constantly dropping it on hard surfaces.
In Jamaica, Nokia phones, particularly the lower end models, are perceived as being very reliable. Drop them, throw them, wet them up, and they just keep on going. Battery life is good, too.
My perception of this is a bit different; Nokias and iPhones are the most seen brands on the different meetings I attend, and especially the E-series from Nokia which are considered solid and straight to the point for busy business people.
> most of Nokia's brand loyalty is because of the indestructible and unbelievably reliable phones they made in the 90's, since then they've been steadily dropping on that front
Nokia phones are still the most reliable and solid, by far... for now.