No, Nokia wasn't selling in 2010. If they were, they'd be worth more than Motorola. After years of dealing with Microsoft only, they were quite worthless because they didn't have any operating system(s) of their own, they didn't have a distribution channel of their own any more, they didn't have the same marketshare and mindshare as before, and ultimately, they weren't in the same position as before.

But even if Nokia were to sell to Google and not Microsoft, they would have been worth more than Motorola in 2013 than $7 Billion dollars based on brand strength (weakened), brand position (weakened) and it would be seen as a bargain at $7 Billion, which honestly I think - and I'm quick to point out how the Nokia Board screwed themselves) is an under-evaluation. And that's what I say about a company that's pissed me off more times than I can count.

Don't forget that Symbian had more share in 2010 than Windows does in 2013. So... are you saying that WP8 is more worthless than Symbian? Think about it.

Not clever enough. It sank their stock prices even further. WP was just a thin bandaid on a very injured Nokia. It didn't stop the bleeding, just slowed it down somewhat.

You're arguing that Android would have been the lesser way. I disagree, Nokia could have handled multiple OS's easily. They had in the past. So why not do it with more modern ones in the future? Take Android, skin it, make it your own. Worked for Samsung. And they've differentiated themselves quite well.

I won't argue that point though. It's not in my best interests since it didn't happen. I can talk about valuation a bit more though; because of the factors that are known - patent portfolio, programming acumen, marketing and mindshare that Nokia still commanded in 2010. And I'll even say this - Maemo/MeeGo was not in their best interests.

Nokia never knew what to do with Maemo or MeeGo. So Android + WP could have been their future. Not Symbian. Not MeeGo. MeeGo should have been adopted by other companies - which, is what Jolla did years later.