[leoc]

Agreed that Android is not an easy gig for mobile-phone manufacturers; it isn't intended to be, after all. But if you look at why Samsung has done well with Android, the reasons appear to be 1) a fairly consistent record of delivering strong hardware, in good time 2) decent public brand recognition and loyalty and 3) not screwing around too badly with the Android software. All of the Android also-rans seem to have had significant problems with at least two of those. Nokia has 1) and 2) pretty much nailed, so if it could only restrain itself on 3) it would be in a position to contest the top of the Android pile with Samsung.

There's also Nokia's strength in featurephones and in the developing world; to maintain that position it will need a smartphone OS it can take to the real masses in the fairly near future. No-one is even suggesting that WinPho can play that role. Android may or may not be the best candidate for the role, but if OP is correct then Nokia's MS relationship hasn't just precluded it from putting Android on entry-level smartphones, it has prevented Nokia from deploying any other smartphone OS at all.