Their concerns mainly center around a lack of specifics on the partnership’s terms and a timeline for future product releases:

• The analysts estimate that Apple’s iOS and Google’s Android platforms are roughly 1,800 times and 900 times more valuable than Windows Mobile 7 respectively. “Catching up will not be easy in our view.”
• Nokia has not given a timeline for its upcoming Windows Phone 7 phones, but the analysts reckon it’ll be difficult to deliver a single WM7 device by October, in time for holiday shipping. Even if Nokia did release a phone that quickly, there’s a risk it could be buggy, and Nokia’s first Windows phone needs to be seen as a success by the market.
• Microsoft is charging Nokia a royalty for using WM7, which surprised the analysts, and it’s still unclear how much the alliance will benefit Nokia: “The fact that MSFT is charging a royalty for its OS in the face of Android also shows, in our opinion, a failure to grasp the platform economics at work.”
• Elop has talked aggressively about cost-cutting but offered few details to determine how much Nokia will be able to save.
• Symbian is a tricky balancing act. JPMorgan estimates that Nokia will ship 70 million Symbian devices in 2011. Assuming Nokia then intends to completely transition from Symbian by mid 2013, we should see a working lower-end version of Windows Phone 7 by early 2012, “not an easy feat in our opinion.”
• What this all boils down to: a dent to profits and earnings per share. The analysts have reduced their 2011 earnings per share forecast by 33% to 37 euro cents, and sees the risk of that decline extending by another 16% to 29 euro cents. “The only real floor to valuation is Nokia’s cash,” they add, which is about 1.44 euros per share using on the 2011 net cash forecast.

Nokia itself then die, can't jump from voice oriented phone to net/web centric smartphone.

Ummmm.....What the fuck are you talking about?

Nokia had the 1st smartphone in the industry - Nokia 9000 (1996)

The Nokia Communicator line was the first of Nokia's smartphones starting with the Nokia 9000, released in 1996. This distinctive palmtop computer style smartphone was the result of a collaborative effort of an early successful and costly personal digital assistant (PDA) by Hewlett Packard combined with Nokia's bestselling phone around that time, and early prototype models had the two devices fixed via a hinge. The Nokia 9210 was the first color screen Communicator model which was the first true smartphone with an open operating system; the 9500 Communicator was also Nokia's first cameraphone Communicator and Nokia's first WiFi phone. The 9300 Communicator was the third dimensional shift into a smaller form factor, and the latest E90 Communicator includes GPS.

Nokia Smartphones

Nokia N97 Mini smartphone - Specs

Nokia N8 smartphone - Specifications

Nokia N900 smartphone - Specifications

Nokia C7 smartphone - Specifications

Nokia C6-01 smartphone - Specifications

Nokia C6 smartphone - Specifications

Nokia C5-03 smartphone - Specifications

Everyone (including you) have ragged on Nokia being too bloated and their days are over in the mobile phone business. So, their board of directors realize that they have problems and are not acting fast enough in the market. Yes, they are bloated. So, bring on Elop, someone they hired to make change, slim things down and get the company operating at a less bloated pace. And Elop, is trying to do what he got hired for. Unfortunately, to achieve the goals set for him, he has to let go of 5,000 employees. Well, keep in mind something very important. In Finland, people pay close to 50% of their wages in taxes. This provides them free healthcare, pays the complete cost of their children to attend college and among many other things, pays them 2 years in salary when they lose a job. They will survive.

Since Elop was hired to create change, of course there will be a backlash from the huge bureaucratic engine that is in place at Nokia. Symbian is still a powerful force but will not be able to compete in the future. MeeGo just needs to go. So, it's either Win phone or Android. By picking Win phone, Elop is creating another formidable contender in the marketplace. Do consumers and carriers want to buy/sell phones that are all the same hardware all running Android? Of course not. If that happened all there would be is a gazillion phones that all did the same thing with "cute loud color curvy plastic". Consumers and carriers want varieties, options, different OS's, different features. And that is what Elop is trying to do, raise competition, and make Nokia a viable competitor (especially in the US).

And as Sean said, over 90% of computers use the Microsoft Windows OS. There is a huge population that will embrace a solid, well respected, brand like Nokia with Win Phone. Yeah, yeah Android is wonderful. But fuck Google. They want to take over the world but their arrogance will fuck them over soon enough (see stuff about their search engine BS).

RIM and Nokia: Carrier-friendly smartphone alternatives

But where Apple and Google are often seen as a threat to wireless operators because they offer value-added services, such as music, navigation, and even language translation, RIM's Balsillie said he wants to help wireless operators extract value from their networks. And Nokia's Elop agreed.
"The tricky dilemma is that there are 900 different carriers," Balsillie said. "How do you enable these different carriers so that they are not hijacked [by someone else's services]?"

Elop said that when carriers talk about Apple and Google there is a sense that they are enabling services thorugh which profits are going in another direction. He said that it's important for the "third ecosystem" in mobile to help carriers retain a lucrative stake.
"The philosophy of this third ecosystem and what Nokia has done for many years is to find a balance with carriers," he said. "There needs to be an operator-friendly player. And we aim to be the most operator-friendly platform out there."

Carriers around the world are embracing devices running iOS software and Android, mostly because these are the devices and services that consumers want. But there is a real fear among wireless operators that the services and capabilities developed as part of these platforms will make the carrier itself irrelevant. It will be Google and Apple that offer all the value to consumers via applications and app store services, while the carrier will only provide basic connectivity. In other words, carriers will become a mere conduit.

What?

Apple, "can't transition to the web centric smartphone"?

Nokia has web centric phones, as I tried to show you yesterday. Fuck, they invented the goddam smartphone.

Android activations visualized from October '08 to January '11

Microsoft gutted Nokia and left them without a chance

The Manchurian CEO did his job as ordered

That brings us back to Nokia and MS. Nokia is getting more than $1
Billion to dump Symbian and/or not move to Android. Fair enough. For the
sake of argument, lets just say that WP7 ‘costs’ $10/phone to license,
and MS kicks back anyone using it $15/phone in ‘bend over, smile, and
think of the queen’ money. Sources tell SemiAccurate that these numbers
are very close to what MS is shelling out, but we were asked to keep
more exact numbers private to avoid identifying sources.

If you look at the numbers of smartphones shipped by Nokia, most of the numbers are pretty close to the ones quoted by Ars Technica,
about 30 million units a quarter. Lets say Nokia loses a bit of
marketshare because of the deal, and in 2012 only ships an average of 25
million WP7 or WP7.x phones a quarter, 100 million for the year. If
each of those costs Nokia $10, Nokia is paying MS $1 Billion/year in
licensing. MS kicks back $15/phone, or $1.5 Billion to everyone else, so
if MS paid HTC/Samsung rates to Nokia, the Finnish company would have
made that proverbial $1 Billion after 2 years by simply using the MS OS
on over the counter rates. With the current setup, after 2 years, MS
makes their $1 Billion back, and then Nokia is bleeding money.

If you look at the Businessweek article that first mentioned the $1 Billion number,
there are two operative quotes. The first is that “Microsoft Corp. will
pay Nokia Oyj more than $1 billion to promote and develop Windows-based
handsets as part of their smartphone software agreement, according to
two people with knowledge of the terms”. Great. Then a bit farther down,
there is this quote, “Nokia’s royalty payments will help Redmond,
Washington- based Microsoft make a profit on the accord even after the
payments to Nokia, one person said.”

http://semiaccurate.com/2011/03/14/microsoft-gutted-nokia-and-left-them-without-a-chance/

Now that Symbian and RIM are dead. It's Android and iOS all the way. Google will make loads of money selling crap on smartphone. They practically has no competition. (Apple is too weak to compete in the long run.)

Well, from the last article linked from the summary:

Linus
Torvalds himself has clearly rejected the idea of using the original
Linux kernel headers in programs that aren't licensed under the GPL. In a
posting to the official Linux kernel mailing list, he made the
following unequivocal statements:

        "In short: you do _NOT_ have the right to use a kernel header
file (or any other part of the kernel sources), unless that use results
in a GPL'd program."

        "So you can run the kernel and create non-GPL'd programs [...]

        BUT YOU CAN NOT USE THE KERNEL HEADER FILES TO CREATE NON-GPL'D BINARIES.

        Comprende?"

Now, I have no idea if
Linus making this assertion is a fully valid legal opinion, but he's
sure as hell under the impression that they're certainly copyrighted.

And, the second link in the summary says:

Recently,
Ray Nimmer, a well-known copyright law professor, observed that there
could also be a problem with the way Google used some key Linux software
code, called kernel header files, to create a vitally important element
of Android. In fact, the way that Google used these files creates a
legal quandary for manufacturers of Android devices and many developers
writing code and applications for those devices.

So, I'm not entirely convinced that your assertion that the header files aren't copyrighted is actually true.

Most of these articles seem to be saying that this quite likely is a violation of copyright.