In my view, that author is just another one of many know-nothing analysts (or at least he lacks the time or will to study Nokia which is what analysts are traditionally paid for). Such articles are a dime a dozen. The entire write-up is based solely on Nokia losing more money, QoQ than RIM. Really? I'm no financial analyst, but even I can do better than that!
-No analysis as to what Nokia's money is being spent on (recurring or not?).
-No mention of Nokia's return to non-IRFS profitability.
-No comment on Nokia's restructuring efforts.
-No mention of Nokia shrinking operational expenditures.
-No mention that very large companies (Nokia) will make much larger profits and losses than comparatively small ones (RIM)
You can't make a prediction of Nokia's financial outlook without considering all of the above. In the article you linked to, none of that is considered. Not a single one, which is why I have difficulty seeing any value in it whatsoever.
I didn't post my link simply as an example of one positive mention of Nokia. I posted is as an example of an analysis that is also worth reading. In general, the more information an analyst takes into account, the less dire their outlook on Nokia becomes (it's never all sunshine either of course). This is a pattern you can see repeated over and over again all over the internet.