The arguments are both easy to understand - Nokia have delivered a handset that shows the world what Windows Phone 8 is capable of, and everyone can step up with their own ideas for best of class hardware ideas.
But if this is the best that Windows Phone can manage, why should a manufacturer not called Nokia even bother?
Even with that premium price tag, I still believe the 1020 is the most attractive WP8 handset out there, and by a decently sized margin. I just talked about what other OEMs would need to do in order to match Nokia’s impressive hardware advancement, but maybe they’ll take one look at how the 1020 outshines what they’ve been working on, consider the effort it would take to compete with a manufacturer that gets so much support from Microsoft, and just decide, “forget it; I’m out.”
Because when you look at the numbers, all those other non-Nokia guys aren’t seeing very serious Windows Phone sales to begin with. Now that Nokia has placed the 1020 up on a very visible pedestal, everyone else is going to have to redouble their efforts just to keep competing at the same level, let alone actually gain some ground on Nokia.
To be fair, this is a pattern that can be seen in many mobile ecosystems - Nokia ruled Symbian, pushing Samsung and Sony Ericsson to the lower percentages, and now Samsung are doing the same trick with Android (and Sony, now in control of the Sony and the Ericsson part of the mobile team, are still in the low percentage market share).
Windows Phone? It belongs to Nokia right now, with roughly four of every five sales a Finnish based handset. Any significant effort has to overcome that issue first, and I'm not sure the competition is ready to take on that challenge.
Schenck's thoughts are here on PocketNow. Which argument do you favour? Which do you think HTC, Samsung, and the rest of the hardware partners will believe?