If you take a very naive view of what it means to be "winning", then sure. But I don't think such a view is ever warranted in business (heck, or even sports).

If you take a very naive view of what it means to be "winning", then sure. But I don't think such a view is ever warranted in business (heck, or even sports). A team that is up by a few points heading into the final period, but has been thoroughly out-played and out-scored in the preceding period is not "winning" in the same way as a team that has been dominating for the entire game. For a company (or team) to be truly "winning", they must be on a trajectory that will lead to long-term sustainability and growth. Nokia (their smartphone business, anyway) was on a downward trajectory, just like RIM (which, up until just a few years ago had a commanding lead over iOS and Android). I could buy the idea that Nokia should have stuck with Meego, or even Maemo and pushed harder to make one of those platforms a commercial success. But the idea that Symbian was winning, under a non-naive definition of the term, is more or less a joke.