So what if WP has failed Microsoft don't care they will get theyr money anyway:

I am suprised no one has realised that you pay MS when run Android anyway

http://readwrite.com/2013/09/04/micr...ogw4Hhhwwr658t

Fokus on Android as anybody else == means ****ing *****s. If they want to success they have to be think different

as I stated so many times before: only who makes money on android is google, microsoft and samsung AFAIK...

I dont call Nokias HW crap that stands for you. Also AFAIK Nokia did care about environment more than anyone else so far. And for me thats something that is possitive.

Second I think alot of the HW engineers dont give a **** what SW it runs on. So they may very well move to Microsoft without problem.

In software engineer side I may agree with you.

BB10 is not top notch, no issue there. And yes I have devved on it too. The only cool thing is that it has somewhat goot QT support (except QML).

Can you detail why you think N9 was a dead end?

It's so sad that it could actually happen. Nintendo do have the "we are so successful, we can do as we please" arrogance about them.

I do agree with the author to a point with nintendo tapping in to the mobile market. Any gamer with a smartphone has mupen or the like, this shows a hunger for people to play nintendo games on their phones. So why not create a nintendo shop and emu for phones?

And it is not like nintendo do not have a DD system already, this has been the way many asian countries have got their games since the days of the Famicom Kiosks.

Back on topic: m$ suckZ0r

N9? It was a disaster. Didnt come close to the leaders in the field. Second tier device. Not smooth, horrible email client, froze, uneven hardware quality, no ecosystem.

What came after the N9?

That's the definition of a dead end. Is it not?

After N9 came winPhone - which was sold, so just another dead end, no?

Pretty much.

Favorite lines of the article:
"After a complicated series of events, Ballmer had decided he was going to retire as Microsoft CEO, a move that the board agreed with, including its powerful chairman and co-founder Bill Gates."

No, that hardware was crappy and it was getting crappier and crappier. Note that the build quality had been going steadily downhill and that everything started to even LOOK the same on the hardware side. Worse, Microsoft demanded what he architecture should be so the Nokia hardware engineers weren't able to even build the hardware they would have wanted or could have excelled at even if they were good (which, once again, I have to think that the best engineers and designers HAD to be so frustrated that they'd been leaving alone the way--I certainly remember reading about many leaving along the time since the switch to the Windows mobile phone crap OS).

Remember, the reason why the Sony Playstation even exists today was because Nintendo (in the 90's) refused to make a CD system add-on for the Super Famicom/SNES or make a system based on disc games. Sony turned around and made their OWN Super Nintendo CD add-on for disc based games and then when they realized what they'd done, turned around and made their own game console BASED on discs--VOILA, the Playstation was born to compete with Nintendo. Nintendo was arrogant enough to stick to their cartridge-based guns, tried to scam Silicon Graphics Inc (SGI) to make a MIPS-based custom CPU/GPU chip for their new console and released the Nintendo 64... and proceeded to lose a LOT of money on each console while making it expensive and difficult to release the larger CD-based third-party games for it.

Basically, this isn't the first time Nintendo's nearly gone out of business because of their arrogance. Much like I'd been saying about Nokia for years: They aren't listening to their customers and giving them what they want. There's where Nokia and Nintendo are eerily repeating the same mistakes lately.