Um.... no. You missed the point, which was not comparison between Harmattan and Sailfish.

Mobile OS's and devices have very long history of development, along with it comes burden of history. Now, if newcomer is to support all the bells and whistles invented in that time frame, it will take huge amount of time and resources even if those technologies are considered to be "already existing." So the choice is either to release something that doesn't have it all, or try to reassure investors to fund closed development for 5+ years to have "everything" in place. And after you launch it, there are those cheeky guys saying it's half baked because there is no support for X or Y, if needed it can be some non-relevant legacy bit from six years after the great potato war....

Also, it's worth mentioning that F-16 was to be cheap, maneuverable fighter without all the bells and whistles instead of super expensive, all-new super-fighter like F-15 or F-14 (which actually was also released half baked, it's development was done in three major parts because it was known that it would never enter the service if everything was to be ready at launch...). Most of F-16's capabilities have been added on later, so it kind of launched half baked. But it was extremely successful. F-35 was not made from scratch either, every invention has roots somewhere and F-35 draws from previous generations of multi-role fighters and iterations of stealth-fighter/bombers. Most of weapons for it already exist and have been in active service for years. How come it takes so much effort to integrate them all? One of the reasons is actually software and kind of UI for all of them, as F-35 is not designed to just bolt on different weapons and use them as it has been done before but to integrate multiple systems into much improved combination of sensor data and situational awareness. Among other fancy things. It's very ambitious plan - which unfortunately has resulted in budget overruns, delays and PR-catastrophe even before entering service. Still, there is a good chance it will turn up to be very competitive in the future.

How does it compare to Sailfish? If there are lessons to be learned, IMO they would be these:

- You don't need to have everything 100% ready at day 1 or even day 2. You need a viable platform to build upon.
- Added features increase overall complexity. Complexity increases the cost and time needed to implement and test it all.
- If you try to do too much in one step, you will end up with budget overruns, delays and boatload of bad PR, no matter how good the end product may be in the future. People just love to see bad things happening (to others).
- Adding features in incremental steps has proved to be effective strategy