Nokia has tried to dominate the mobile phone industry before and succeeded for several years. But, in recent years, it's had production problems (does anyone have a Nokia more than a year old that is still in full working order?), failed to fully develop the then best smart-phone operating system, Symbian, (hence diving headfirst into Windows mobile - it's someone else's marketing dollar) and it's produced a range of phones for which the designs have simply failed to live up to the company's previous high standards.

Microsoft, on the other hand, has tried almost everything it can to knock RIM's Blackberry out of favour, from harassing RIM with IP suits to trying a spoiler product which has hardly set the world on fire.

Over at MS's arch rival, however, the iPhone has rejuvenated a computer company, made its products cool for the mass market and powered Apple to seemingly ever greater heights: even when its products aren't as good as they should be the Apple halo still covers them in glory.

But in the US market, it's Google that's shaken everybody up. Through its tie up with HTC, Google's Android operating system is now a serious rival to the iPhone. Just a few months ago, people were saying that the iPhone is for consumers, the Blackberry is for business and Android is for techies and geeks.

No more: Android, in its latest version, is a fully fledged rival to the iPhone operating system. And as users of "apps" such as "WhatApp" can attest, Android gives them far more control over what Apps can and cannot do on their phones and when.

Android is an open system - although HTC is the dominant player, there are many other manufacturers jumping on that particular bandwagon.

Android phones are cheaper than iPhones, driving Apple to this week leak that it is looking into making a cheaper version of the iPhone. There is little expectation that Nokia / Microsoft will be cheaper. And in any case, several manufacturers already offer Windows 7 mobile on their phones - including HTC and Sony Ericsson.

The thing is, there's nothing new about smart phones: Ericsson launched on more than a decade ago: it ran on Symbian. But the market grew dramatically with the launch of the iPhone.

So which operating system dominates the smart-phone industry in the USA? The answer, surprisingly, is Symbian, according to research by Gartner. The company says that, in 2010, Symbian had a 37.6% market share. But that was down from 46.9% in 2009. The big gainer was Android: 3.9% in 2009 to 2.7% in 2010.

Blackberry doesn't get involved in per cent of market share arguments (it's still got healthy share, say Gartner) but rather says that the company makes leaps in turnover and profitability each year and that's more important that a rudimentary assessment of market share. And they are right: the phone isn't their only revenue stream, unlike other manufacturers.

Announcing the Microsoft / Nokia deal, the parties said that they now saw mobile phones as a three horse race, discounting Blackberry. That's Microsoft's PR department trying to drive the knife in. After all, in 2010, those Gartner figures that Blackberry doesn't care about showed that RIM's market share was approximately four times greater than Microsoft's. Snide comments are all Microsoft has left in its battle with RIM unless its tie up with the sliding power that is Nokia can rejuvenate them.

But it's research by Canalys that will shows why Nokia and MS are desperate bed fellows: global operating system share for 2010 sales shows Android on top with 33% and Symbian close behind with 31%. Apple and RIM are 16% and 14% respectively. That leaves just 6% shared equally between Windows Mobile for 3% and the balance split between several minor players. But, says the company, that figure for Symbian is Nokia sales only: adding in Sony Ericsson, Samsung and a couple of others swings the balance slightly in favour of Symbian.

So, Nokia's Symbian is not dead yet, but Android has caught up with it in just two years after launch.

That's a stunning performance and, as more "apps" find their way to Android phones, there is clearly much more growth to come.

So, is it really a three-horse race?

No: It's clearly still Symbian and Android out on top - and until lower priced phones come from major manufacturers, those are still going to dominate in the developing world - and amongst cost-conscious purchasers; RIM will not go away - it is far too embedded in corporate culture although challenges to it around the world have caused some problems. And if those challenges are genuine, then most of them will also apply to encrypted e-mail via the MS platform.

Symbian is now open source and so can compete with Android in the App market: but for some reason it's not being very fashionable - probably because it is already quite old hat.

Apple's USA market share is to an extent due to "trendyness" - as is its popularity in Singapore. A quick scan around a Kuala Lumpur bar full of bankers last night produced not a single iPhone, a few Blackberries, several Sony Ericsson and Nokia - and a rash of HTC, some of which were so old their users have a stylus to poke the touch screen with - but were devoted to their phones.

It's in markets like that that MS / Nokia need to build their reputation.

That's not going to be easy.

And it is by no means certain that they are going to be in the top three unless Nokia dumps Symbian (so removing choice) and MS spends a vast amount on marketing. Nokia has said that it intends to do just that. So Microsoft's marketing muscle will be what Nokia has to rely on.

Users are going to have a simple choice: if they don't want Windows, don't buy Nokia.

And then there's that little piece of news that came out of Nokia while this article was being penned. It has announced that the company will not - repeat not - install the current version of Windows 7 mobile (whcih it calls something different but we can't be bothered to keep up). the next version, codenamed "mango" is slated for release in October.

From the perspective of a user, already disenchanted with Nokia's fall-off in quality, the plan looks like a deal with the devil. And Nokia phones are off a large number of Christmas lists for those who have already decided not to opt for the MS platform on their mobile devices.

Nokia - now led by a (former?) Microsoft man, Stephen Elop, says that they have nothing close to the iPhone experience. That's true. And the company's development of the MeeGo operating system has been, er, patchy.

The scale of Nokia's foul up was set out by Elop when he spoke to Nokia employees last week: "The first iPhone shipped in 2007, and we still don't have a product that is close to their experience. Android came on the scene just over two years ago and this week they took our leadership position in smartphone volumes. Unbelievable," he said.

So, for Nokia even the company head sees that there is a do or die situation developing.

The question is whether the company has backed the right horse. This newspaper says "no." It should have gone with Android.

What Nokia has now done is to become fiscally dependent on Microsoft. MS have got a phone company with a huge market share without paying a penny for it. And as Nokia declines, as many expect it to do, it will - ultimately - prove a potential takeover target for Microsoft.

And it will still be fourth in the three horse race it predicted earlier this week.