What phones? Maybe there are some in the US and Europe, but they could have tried to go for the rest of the world.
There are exactly zero Windows phones available for my carrier, I could choose between Android (affordable) and iPhone (expensive), or other stuff like Samsung's Bada phones or Nokia's dying Symbian phones.
I would have considered a Windows phone had it been an option, but I probably wouldn't have bought it unless it had superior hardware or performance, because Android has such a large ecosystem (I bought a Galaxy Ace for Christmas).
Edit: the article basically answers itself: "Microsoft also needs to get a wider range of phones into the market, and do a better job of educating people about the platform's appeal. "
This article is ridiculous because it just states that WP7 is superior to Android without explaining why. So far their metro UI has yet to prove itself, people want apps, if I wanted their metro UI so badly there is probably already an Android app for that too.
Microsoft spent a lot on commercials, I have seen a lot more WP commercials than Android ads, Microsoft got Nokia as their partner, Nokia in turn has a lot of partners of it's own, still their product failed, because it's inferior to the consumers, hardware manufacturers and carriers.
There are exactly zero Windows phones available for my carrier, I could choose between Android (affordable) and iPhone (expensive), or other stuff like Samsung's Bada phones or Nokia's dying Symbian phones.
I would have considered a Windows phone had it been an option, but I probably wouldn't have bought it unless it had superior hardware or performance, because Android has such a large ecosystem (I bought a Galaxy Ace for Christmas).
Edit: the article basically answers itself: "Microsoft also needs to get a wider range of phones into the market, and do a better job of educating people about the platform's appeal. "