[alexandrerond]

This is a very extended assumption which is quite wrong.

When Nokia opted for MS all paths were already downhill. Going with Android would have meant and injection of money from Google, but clearly Nokia was not prepared to land in the highly dense Android ecosystem, fighting for a tiny piece of the cake with giants like Samsung. There was no way that Nokia would have a success in Android that would put out the fire.

MS in turned meant to have most of the Windows Phone market for itself and a BIG partner behind. As terrible as WP was at the beginning, it bought Nokia a LOT of time. Nokia reorganized its business in the meantime, separated the location business (what is now HERE), the NSN side and consolidated its patent portfolio and research divisions.

This way, they managed in the end to sell Devices to Microsoft, which was a huge burden. And then sell HERE (which wasn't really profitable) to the automotive consortium. With this two moves they kept the company afloat, along with many great assets that actually make and will make money (the research division and NSN ), and the brand.

Had Nokia opted for Android back then, it would have ended much worse (Blackberry maker comes to mind). I think from the point of view of share-holders, Nokia escaped dodged a terrible future. Basically they took their things and left the platform in the rescue boat, while the rescuers (MS) burn with it.

[bitmapbrother]

I always despise such theories of what would have happened had Nokia selected Android instead of Windows. You have absolutely no idea what would have happened. What we do know is that selecting a single OS from a company that had ulterior motives was a key to their demise. It's clear the Microsoft decision was a failure and anything else is just rampant speculation. It was nice, though, to see Nokia get the last laugh by selling their device division to MS for 7+ Billion dollars.

As for Nokia, well, we'll see how they do when they re-enter the smartphone market in late 2016 free of Microsoft.