> (it was also open-source like Android, and in many ways a better OS).
Open source is not a very big selling point to the masses. WebOS was open source and better than Android at the time, had good reviews, but it flopped miserably.
>Speaking of ecosystems, fast forward a few years, if Nokia had indeed attempted to push Meego and failed, Android would have been the logical choice
You're assuming that Nokia would not be dead from all the losses in the meantime. Microsoft was pumping $250M into them per quarter to ease the transition. If Nokia went alone, it may not have survived the big transition to Meego.
>and it was only Elop's allegiance to Microsoft which killed it.
No, it was Nokia's board that hired him in the first place and approved all his big decisions.
Best phone and OS according to who? The same folks who cheered on the OpenMoko? As Elop said, the market has turned from a battle of devices into a war of ecosystems. Meego would've ended up like BB10 running on QNX(remember how many folks on here salivated about a QNX based mobile OS?), critically appreciated but with no apps and sales.
Nokia recently became the fourth largest OEM in the US market.
http://pocketnow.com/2013/11/01/nokia-smartphone-sales
I doubt that given Nokia never really had a brand in the US for smartphones, it could've done so without Microsoft's support.
Sad to see so many technical folks wanting Blackberry and Nokia to join the Android bandwagon. The mobile market needs more competition and diversity, not less, or it will end up like the PC market did. If you want an Android phone, there's an immense variety already out there. It's like recommending that Apple scrap OS X and ship Windows on their Macs.
Bill Gates has spent a lot of time among the world's poorest poor. When you do that, your perspective changes completely and he seems to be talking from that perspective.
Also, did you read the linked article? He clearly addresses your point.
>Innovation is a good thing. The human condition – put aside bioterrorism and a few footnotes – is improving because of innovation,” he says. But while “technology’s amazing, it doesn’t get down to the people most in need in anything near the timeframe we should want it to”.
Well, what Google and Gates' are doing is still better than Jobs' take on charity from his biography that demeans it:
"“Bill is basically unimaginative and has never invented anything, which is why I think he’s more comfortable now in philanthropy than technology. He just shamelessly ripped off other people’s ideas.”"
