You made the conclusion too soon. A few years ago, Nokia spent 7B to acquire one of the two major map companies in the last 20 years. Nokia has been researching on mobile communications since 1980s, far earlier than Apple and Samsung. On the other hand, Microsoft and Palm (no longer exist, in practice) were the pioneers on smartphones. In theory, Microsoft and Nokia have more contribution than anyone except Motorola in the market. Of course, in practice, Microsoft and Nokia need to sync up really well to bring out the research done in the past 30 or so years. Therefore, Nokia didn't sell its soul to Microsoft. Technically, Nokia and Microsoft should join their souls together!
Please think carefully. In Android camp, HTC, Samsung, Motorola, Sony were IN from the very beginning. With practically very small market share in smartphones, Nokia probably won't get any preferential treatment from Google. So, would you suggest Nokia to be a 2nd or 3rd class citizen in the Android camp, or become the #1 partner in the WP camp? Nokia should perhaps consider Android as the 2nd smartphone OS. However, we should all admire the determination which Nokia showed by going all in with WP. It is too early to judge Nokia for the smartphone OS decision!
If they had adopted Android in the beginning when many others had, they would have had *much* more leverage in negotiating with Microsoft. I think the MS deal did make sense, but they should have waved their plan B (Android) in Balmer's face during negotiations.
I fully agree. Compatibility between my phone, tablet and laptop is a big advantage, at least in my opinion. We have Android phones and tablets in our family and W 7 laptops. I will switch to W 8 phones and tablets as soon as the initial bugs are fixed in W 8.