[azakai]

It's obviously not quite the same, but Microsoft supporting Android apps on Windows Phone reminds me of IBM supporting Windows apps on OS/2. Supporting your competitor's apps can prevent some immediate suffering by users, but it isn't a good strategy for an ecosystem.

If people end up mostly running the emulated apps on your OS, you might as well just use that other OS, and run those apps on it natively, for the best experience. And figure out a way to run your ecosystem on top of that. Specifically here, that would mean for Microsoft to switch to Cyanogen for its devices, and ship a .NET runtime so Windows Phone apps can work on it.

I doubt that's a great idea, but I think it's better than emulating Android apps on top of Windows Phone. I'm just guessing here though.

[SyneRyder]

On the other hand, Parallels Desktop, VMWare and Bootcamp helped a lot of people switch from Windows computers over to the Mac. Sometimes it can work out & bring more customers.

[MichaelGG]

Sure, that's obviously the debate inside MS, or they'd done it a long time ago. But it's clear, despite the Windows Store touting app counts, that WP is just not happening. So providing a slow, limited emulator could help bridge the gap on essential apps, while not totally giving up. Otherwise folks like me that would really prefer Windows Phone, we're just gonna stick to Android.