You know what? I've never even checked. I somehow doubt it due to how they've implemented QML (as I've taken it to be so far) but I'm just not knowledgable enough to answer this fully. Sorry about that.

You can get z10 for $270 in US....tells you how much value it holds

You could argue it is a bargain at that prize

Not selling well here..a salesman said that people want a "button"...tells you how much iphone imprinted people

Has nothing to do with it.

I've seen a lot of potential in Android, none which was utilized.
Such as the performance and intuitiveness of MIUI/Custom ROMs.
The features packed into it.
The thin, and high-end of certain devices.
And the design and feel of other devices.

Now here's the kicker.... there's no device that brings these together.
They all compromise, where a compromise is unnecessary.

Imagine if Nokia had decided to "go Android" ?
They could've built the first button-less device like the N9.
Bring forth the OtherHalf concept (not sure if this was an ex-nokia idea).
Nail the qwerty phones, and "weird phones" like the Kyocera Echo and NOTE series.
Then conquer the low-end/poor demographics.
Possibly built the Frontal Dual Loudspeaker concept before HTC One.
Made kickstands, useful ones.
Perhaps replaceable batteries on top of this too?

Anyways, the sky is the limit.
They had the resources and the ability to do so (if history's shown anything).

And doing so.... they could've turned around and still supported WP.
And at the end of the day... they PROBABLY wouldn't have lost as much value doing so.
In fact, they could've become a major contender as long as they maintained the mindshare of people.

Now what are they?
Not even a "third racer". After Samsung and Apple, people think about HTC, LG and maybe SONY. Motorola is also a contender.

So not only did Nokia shoot themselves in the foot... they decided to take a seat instead of limping while the zombies pursued them. I would've preferred Nokia get WP and become a successful third contender... but WP is so inferior to the other offerings in terms of customizability, features and support that its pretty funny.

Part of this is Nokia's fault. Part of this is MS's fault.
At the end, its the consumers who suffered.

Kangal gets it. Nokia could have created a GNU/Linux-based Galaxy Note 3 four years ago. And with a kick-a*s kickstand to boot.

@Gerbick

Sorry you are right, let me "Gerbick Proof" this for you.

From Gerbick, Quote:"Care to do the same?"

My Response "I thought I just did, see above." ... 3

From Gerbick, Quote:"That's your understanding of that phrase ..."

My Response "Perhaps you are challenged by two words?" ... 1

From Gerbick, Quote:"Care to answer why many more chose otherwise?"

My Response "er ... because they want to?" ... 2

From Gerbick, Quote:"Thinking that your way is the only way ..."

My Response "I am not sure I stated anything of the sort ... but you have missunderstood me on this point before."

rgds

1: At no point have I stated that I was offended by these words.

2. The very definition of freedom of choice.

3. (ref #2299) Originally Posted by uTMY "Because it is demeaning and derogatory towards Customers."

I am not sure what else you are expecting me to add to each of these?

@Daperl

Kangal gets it with one small correction.

Only some Customers suffered, the rest switched to Android.

rgds

I'm not really sure what your point is, but I switched to Android and I'm suffering for it.

I have to say I disagree with @Kangal et al, Android would not have been the golden choice for Nokia. I go so far as even argue that WP was better than Android for Nokia... ( damn I never thought I would realy say something like this... but there you go )

The reason; Android is not a good OS, it is so horribly resource hungry abomination it needs more CPU power & memory than my desktop machine to run acceptably.

It is just not a good choice. WP is bad and ugly, Android is just plain bad.

They had the correct choice in their paws and thy let it slip away... all for some abstract ecosystemig/appcentric reasons. :sigh: