There we go again.
From
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proprietary
"1: one that possesses, owns, or holds exclusive right to something; specifically : proprietor
2: something that is used, produced, or marketed under exclusive legal right of the inventor or maker; specifically : a drug (as a patent medicine) that is protected by secrecy, patent, or copyright against free competition as to name, product, composition, or process of manufacture
3: a business secretly owned by and run as a cover for an intelligence organization"
Nokia is NOT the exclusive proprietor of Symbian as you posted. RIM on the other hand has exclusive control over their OS. Which is not something I even talked about by the way. Go back and READ what I posted.
"RogerPodacter: what exactly is RIM using for the OS? is it a windows variant? proprietary?" was the question. The OS used by RIM is PROPRIETARY TO RIM. PERIOD. It is not Windows Mobile obviously, it is something made in-house.
My employer btw (Fortune 500 software company) uses Blackberry devices exclusively for mobile corporate email. So don't assume I don't know what the operating system is like. The phones listed above are my personal devices.
So, would RIM have gained ANY traction in the corporate world, nevermind outside it, if it were not for their integration with corporate servers for push email? Highly unlikely. Which is why they are trying to diversify their offerings as much as possible, right now their solution is the one big differentiator from Apple. If they lose that they stand to lose a lot more than just some personal BB users defecting to Apple.
Ps.. I agree though that Apple has to step up and actually work to convince larger organizations that it can serve their corporate needs with end to end support, which it may not bother doing (or may not even be capable of).