[rbanffy]

Oh. Apple will litigate aggressively, of course. But Nokia is clearly moving towards becoming either a target for acquisition as a whole or, after dismemberment, its patent portfolio is. Microsoft won't do it openly, however. It's more likely they'll employ proxies for that, not unlike the way they funded SCO's campaign. Besides, we are talking about Nokia's current relationship with Microsoft, not Apple.

Don't you think it's a bit suspicious a recently hired CEO who was until recently a high profile Microsoft employee discontinues a major platform investment on the eve of launching a competitive product (I have played with the N9 and it's a very good phone) and bets the company on a yet-unproven (and I am being more than generous on this assessment) Microsoft product?

[trezor]

Don't you think it's a bit suspicious a recently hired CEO who was until recently a high profile Microsoft employee discontinues a major platform investment on the eve of launching a competitive product (I have played with the N9 and it's a very good phone) and bets the company on a yet-unproven (and I am being more than generous on this assessment) Microsoft product?

I haven't tried the N9 so I cannot comment on it nor the platform which powered it, only that historically, Nokia's only edge has been good hardware. They have been (and still are, as far as I have seen) absolutely horrible at software.

I would trust a platform made by Microsoft infinitely more than anything coming out of Nokia HQ, and that is despite all the failings of Microsoft in the mobile and tablet space.

Now... With that said: There is no doubt that by going the Microsoft route Nokia is losing something. They are now a generic phone-vendor delivering someone else's OS. They no longer fully own their own platform and stack.

This is quite a significant loss and definitely a big risk. However: Given Nokia's history with delivering software and software-platforms, I think it's a smaller risk than trying (once again) to deliver something made in-house.

And I really don't find it "suspicious" that a recently hired CEO choose to turn to technology and people he already know. I find it a very obvious move, even though it's not very obvious if it is the best choice or not.

[rbanffy]

Even if you discounted MeeGo as a no-go (no pun intended) as I did before playing with the N9, Android would make more sense - they already had Linux kernels running well on their hardware and had them for ages. Building Android on top of that would be trivial. And quick.

Nokia could also be the only Android phone maker that would be completely imune to lawsuits by any other phone maker. And from Microsoft ("It's a shame you are suing us, you know. It would be horrible if we decided to sue all your WinMo 6 and 7 OEMs").

[trezor]

Even if you discounted MeeGo as a no-go (no pun intended) as I did before playing with the N9, Android would make more sense

Just to clarify: I never claimed that doing Windows Phone 7 was the better option over than doing Android. I claimed that delivering someone else's OS is probably the wiser bet for Nokia, as historically they've been just awful with software.

And with a CEO coming straight from Microsoft, going the WP7-route instead of doing Android, seems like a pretty obvious and "safe" decision.

[rbanffy]

> And with a CEO coming straight from Microsoft, going the WP7-route instead of doing Android, seems like a pretty obvious and "safe" decision.

I always tell my friends who work for Microsoft to never, ever drink their Kool Aid.