I've come to the conclusion that technology had little if anything to do with Nokia's decision to "partner" Microsoft or with their hiring of ms-elop to do the deed.

Nokia used to be driven by design and engineering.

Then, probably due to Big Investors' pressure, Nokia's management and board switched their priorities on monetizing their leading position instead.

Well, they fumbled their big ticket Navteq and Ovi integration (Symbian may not be the easiest of jungles to live in...) while competitors A and later G managed theirs better and most importantly got devices and new technologies out to the marketplace.

Qt on Android - indeed Qt everywhere (*) - sounds great from an engineering and developers' point of view, but does it directly increase Nokia's revenues? Hmm, I think we have the answer.

I would guess that Nokia's short-lived negotiations with Google revolved around, besides money and level of exclusivity, on whether Google could and would adopt Qt as a top-level component of Android (Google does use Qt elsewhere already). But primarily how Nokia could into that wonderful toll-gate/commission position they now covet.

MS-Ballmer gave Nokia, at least in the short term, a place for their Maps and a small cut of commission revenues. Who cares about technology, their own developer eco-system or employees when there's a last chance to try to validate Nokia bosses vision of their "own" revenue-generating services!

So Qt was more of a sacrifial lamb than a serious driver in this quest for a commission-generating "partner".

Qt of course can still "go places" and it will be interesting to see who will be driving its growth.


(*) Qt everywhere... would've been great for rebuilding secure and throughly integrated IT and communications infrastructure for businesses and governmental sevices while replacing the existing joke sold (actually "leased") by Microsoft. So everybody except MS and elop will end up losers in the deal.