> Nokia's worst case here is more then likely getting bought vs. being left for dead like SGI.
... for 10% what they were worth at the time Elop gave the "burning platform" speech.
SGI was technically bought as well. That's really a bad resolution for Nokia, and is far from being a "worst case". If MS decides to produce phones themselves, it is likely Nokia will be left to whither and die.
It might look unlikely now, but unless you were in the know, just a month ago it seemed very unlikely that MS will make their own tablets.
a) already have a good relationship with the carriers
b) have someone like Steve Jobs
Nokia at least has (a), Microsoft has neither (Verizon likely still has enough Kin that they won't be hurting for paperweights for quite a while). Microsoft can't afford to kill their only guaranteed in with the carriers.
Also, another parallel is Palm. They had PalmOS phones when they partnered with Microsoft and made the Treo WinMo line that ended up competing and reducing their own offering's relevance.
> they chose a partner with deep pockets($60B cash in the bank)
Is only half the story. They chose a partner who has a record of being a horrible partner for companies in their condition -- which is in a lot of ways similar to both HP and SGI pre-Windows (good hardware, trying to get out of the OS business, rely on Microsoft). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Belluzzo
So, this partner has a horrible relevant track record, twice. I don't see how Nokia can expect (or could have expected a couple of years ago) to fare better than SGI or HP's high end computing unit did.