Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 27th Dec 2011 21:50 UTC
Windows Fascinating, this. As a Windows Phone 7 user, I can attest that it is every bit as good as iOS and Android - heck, in my experience, it is more polished, more consistent, smoother, and faster than either of those two. Yet, despite raving reviews and glowing user comments all over the web, Windows Phone 7 simply isn't selling. Former Windows Phone 7 general manager Charlie Kindel believes it's because neither carriers nor device makers like the control Microsoft exerts over the platform.
Order by: Score:
Not every bit as good.
by reduz on Tue 27th Dec 2011 22:26 UTC
reduz
Member since:
2006-02-25

> As a Windows Phone 7 user, I can attest that it is every bit as good as
> iOS and Android - heck, in my experience.


As a Developer it's not only NOT even a bit as good as Android, It's a turd. It's .net only and there is simply no way to port existing iOS and Android apps, since it can't run C++, Java or Objective C. It also does not support OpenGL ES, something Android, IOS, Bada, QNX, nacl, etc support.

If you make a new phone OS, at least make it easy to port your Android or iOS apps to it, that arrogant attitude of forcing developers to use .net and DirectX is their doom.

So, what hopes does that phone hold given that it will probably never be popular with developers?

Reply Score: 13

v RE: Not every bit as good.
by cetp on Tue 27th Dec 2011 22:44 UTC in reply to "Not every bit as good."
RE: Not every bit as good.
by moondevil on Tue 27th Dec 2011 22:50 UTC in reply to "Not every bit as good."
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

As far as apps go, WP7 already has lots of them, so .NET is not an issue for the developers and customers won't care as long as their favorite apps are available.

The main issue is what people are buying.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Not every bit as good.
by leos on Wed 28th Dec 2011 00:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Not every bit as good."
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

As far as apps go, WP7 already has lots of them, so .NET is not an issue for the developers and customers won't care as long as their favorite apps are available.


Yes there are "lots", but there are some very significant missing players like Skype. That's a direct result of Microsoft "my way or the highway" approach to development that makes it pretty difficult for Skype to bring something to the platform in a reasonable timeframe.

Apple got away with that approach for a long time and even they softened their stance eventually to allow other frameworks and languages to target iOS. Funny how Microsoft didn't learn anything from the history of iOS or Android.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Not every bit as good.
by jackeebleu on Wed 28th Dec 2011 02:22 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not every bit as good."
jackeebleu Member since:
2006-01-26

Um, you do realize that Microsoft owns Skype right? And its only a matter of time that Skype runs native on WP7....right?

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2011/may11/05-10corpnewspr...

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Not every bit as good.
by leos on Thu 29th Dec 2011 02:32 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Not every bit as good."
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

Um, you do realize that Microsoft owns Skype right? And its only a matter of time that Skype runs native on WP7....right?


Eventually, eventually. Eventually I will be able to beam myself to china instead of flying there. Not exactly relevant if I can't do it now.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Not every bit as good.
by zima on Sat 31st Dec 2011 20:08 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Not every bit as good."
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Yeah, one is only a fantasy quite likely not really sensible in this universe (at least not as typically imagined by silly humans in their modern mythologies; mind uploading OTOH...), the other is a virtual certainty, coming soon, and so on.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Not every bit as good.
by n4cer on Wed 28th Dec 2011 03:28 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not every bit as good."
n4cer Member since:
2005-07-06

"As far as apps go, WP7 already has lots of them, so .NET is not an issue for the developers and customers won't care as long as their favorite apps are available.


Yes there are "lots", but there are some very significant missing players like Skype. That's a direct result of Microsoft "my way or the highway" approach to development that makes it pretty difficult for Skype to bring something to the platform in a reasonable timeframe.

Apple got away with that approach for a long time and even they softened their stance eventually to allow other frameworks and languages to target iOS. Funny how Microsoft didn't learn anything from the history of iOS or Android.
"

Major ISVs like Skype could potentially get a waiver enabling them to use unmanaged code, however, while Skype would've needed such a waiver for 7.0 due to the lack of managed APIs for required functionality, it probably would not for 7.5 (Mango) unless Skype just didn't want to do a version in managed code.

Skype is a bad example though because the delay in bringing it to the WP platform is because it is due to be integrated into the platform, similar to how messaging is handled in Mango.

While I'm personally a proponent of restricting the API to .NET, it appears increasingly likely that MS is working on an unmanaged API based on WinRT.

As far as learning from Android, MS purposely tried to avoid that since they have the history of Windows Mobile from which to learn. They've already been through non-uniform updates, OEMs and carriers producing devices with subpar specs or custom UIs, or preloading crapware, the ability to bog down your device by giving apps free reign -- altogether contributing to poor user experience and brand erosion. It's something they didn't want to repeat.

Edited 2011-12-28 03:38 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE: Not every bit as good.
by dastopher on Tue 27th Dec 2011 23:00 UTC in reply to "Not every bit as good."
dastopher Member since:
2011-12-27

Lolol!

I love developing for Windows Phone. Waaay better than Android.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Not every bit as good.
by David on Tue 27th Dec 2011 23:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Not every bit as good."
David Member since:
1997-10-01

I think the way this is breaking down is:

Developers who use/like .NET like developing for WP7
Developers who don't want to use .NET won't develop for WP7.

Microsoft built its empire by building up a vast army of developers for its platform. (Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! )

But it's not having much luck getting all its Windows developers to rush to WP7, and the developers who've already made an investment in mobile don't want to do .NET development (It was bad enough having their arms twisted into picking up Obj-C)

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Not every bit as good.
by _txf_ on Tue 27th Dec 2011 23:17 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not every bit as good."
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

Plus adding to the fact that they cannot import native code from their apps on other platforms means that they have to start from scratch on WP7.

Whilst it is true that you wouldn't want some non native interface, I just don't understand why things like games (or lower level code) cannot be natively compiled...wait..it wouldn't make a difference as MS wouldn't support OpenglES anyway...

Edited 2011-12-27 23:18 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Not every bit as good.
by lucas_maximus on Wed 28th Dec 2011 01:54 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Not every bit as good."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

The thing is that building anything with .NET is ridiculously easy compared to Java.

XAML is pretty much XML and a Stylesheet. Have you tried doing interfaces with Android and Java ... It sucks.

Specialist games developers won't have problems porting their code from OpenGL to DirectX.

Edited 2011-12-28 01:56 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Not every bit as good.
by reduz on Wed 28th Dec 2011 03:35 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Not every bit as good."
reduz Member since:
2006-02-25

it's not about ease, it's about profit

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Not every bit as good.
by aaronmcohen on Wed 28th Dec 2011 03:39 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Not every bit as good."
aaronmcohen Member since:
2011-09-19

Unfortunately for MS, Corporations are now embracing the "Bring your own device" mantra. It may be really hard to sell ELAs for Mobile devices. Thuse Ease of the product to the consumer will dictate Profit for the developers, carriers, and 3rd party developers.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Not every bit as good.
by lemur2 on Wed 28th Dec 2011 06:16 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Not every bit as good."
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

The thing is that building anything with .NET is ridiculously easy compared to Java.

XAML is pretty much XML and a Stylesheet. Have you tried doing interfaces with Android and Java ... It sucks.


Au contraire:

http://sourceforge.net/p/necessitas/home/necessitas/

What is Necessitas ?

Necessitas is the codename for the port of Qt on the Android Operating System and of the user-friendly Qt Creator Integration with Android,

This project provides you Qt for the Android Operating System, and a first-class citizen IDE letting you manage, develop, deploy, run & debug your Qt Applications on Android Devices.

...

You can download the binary precompiled sdk and follow our 5 minutes three-click install guide on the wiki pages, to start writing Qt C/C++ Android applications right now.


One is not constrained to just one language on Android.

http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/10940

http://code.google.com/p/python-for-android/

Given Qt and QtCreator, one also has QtQuick and QML.

http://blip.tv/bogdan-vatra/qt-quick-ui-3432191

Edited 2011-12-28 06:29 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Not every bit as good.
by lucas_maximus on Wed 28th Dec 2011 07:03 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Not every bit as good."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Why would I use this?

QT will only run on Android and there aren't many phones with Meego on it.

It is better to use something like Titanium and do a separate Windows Phone 7 port.

Edited 2011-12-28 07:08 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Not every bit as good.
by lemur2 on Wed 28th Dec 2011 07:34 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Not every bit as good."
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Why would I use this? QT will only run on Android.


The thing is that building anything with Qt/QtQuick/QML is ridiculously easy.

Android is the number 1 mobile platform. In comparison the market for a WP7-only mobile app built with .NET pales into insignificance.

Edited 2011-12-28 07:36 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Not every bit as good.
by saynte on Wed 28th Dec 2011 08:16 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Not every bit as good."
saynte Member since:
2007-12-10

While the Necessitas work is quite interesting, I'm not sure it's practical at the moment.

It requires much of the Qt runtime to run the applications, and this is a very large download for a (generally) space- and bandwidth-limited platform.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Not every bit as good.
by lemur2 on Wed 28th Dec 2011 09:22 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Not every bit as good."
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

While the Necessitas work is quite interesting, I'm not sure it's practical at the moment.

It requires much of the Qt runtime to run the applications, and this is a very large download for a (generally) space- and bandwidth-limited platform.


OK for tablets. As long as you have the Qt runtime, you may as well opt for Calligra Active as a mobile Office Suite.

This would all make for a reasonably nice tablet platform IMO.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Not every bit as good.
by lucas_maximus on Wed 28th Dec 2011 15:32 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Not every bit as good."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

This is not the point the OP was trying to make. For a .NET developer, moving from something like ASP.NET to Windows Phone is extremely easy.

Also I ask again, Why would I use QML and QT over Titanium, where my app will both run on iOS and Android if built in Titanium?

Edited 2011-12-28 15:40 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Not every bit as good.
by moondevil on Wed 28th Dec 2011 15:42 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Not every bit as good."
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Necessitas is not supported by Google, they even initially discouraged the work on it on their Android mailing lists.

Plus you need to use big executables, statically compiled to be able to distribute the applications.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Not every bit as good.
by _txf_ on Wed 28th Dec 2011 10:41 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Not every bit as good."
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

Specialist games developers won't have problems porting their code from OpenGL to DirectX.


Yeah go ahead... Tell epic games that they have to rewrite the unreal engine in managed code. (directx is less of/not a problem)

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Not every bit as good.
by moondevil on Wed 28th Dec 2011 14:37 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Not every bit as good."
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Even Sony is now using .NET for PS Vita and PlayStation Suite.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clk3uu6o5KY

Plus if Microsoft wants, they can also provide AOT compilation in future WP versions. This is where I seem them making use of WinRT in WP.

The game industry is changing. And most professional studios don't care anyway. They use whatever is required on the platforms they wish to target.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Not every bit as good.
by _txf_ on Wed 28th Dec 2011 15:01 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Not every bit as good."
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

Sure....net is fine for most apps and frontends to web services, but performance critical game engines are never going to be done in .net.

Sure...they can provide winRT in the future, but they don't now. And even then game engines/ native code will have to be rewritten to take advantage of winRT apis.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Not every bit as good.
by zima on Sat 31st Dec 2011 02:19 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Not every bit as good."
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Sure....net is fine for most apps and frontends to web services, but performance critical game engines are never going to be done in .net. [...]

Just like they'll never be done in C++ or ObjC, till the dawn of time in asm or eventually C, I bet?

There are plenty of popular, successful games made in XNA, in Xbox Live Arcade. Some available already on WP7, too... (heck, or even on iOS - say, the list on http://monogame.codeplex.com/ )
Yes, yes, "not serious" games usually - well, that's what most of handheld gaming is, anyway.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Not every bit as good.
by tanishaj on Wed 28th Dec 2011 06:21 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not every bit as good."
tanishaj Member since:
2010-12-22

I think the way this is breaking down is:

Developers who use/like .NET like developing for WP7
Developers who don't want to use .NET won't develop for WP7.


The language I prefer most is C# (so, .NET). I have used C# to develop apps for both iOS and Android (using MonoTouch and Mono for Android). I have yet to create a Windows Phone 7 app.

So, avoiding .NET is not the whole story.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Not every bit as good.
by reduz on Wed 28th Dec 2011 03:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Not every bit as good."
reduz Member since:
2006-02-25

Some people love being poor.

The point is pretty much that it's not nearly as profitable to write apps for WP7. Even if profits were half the profits of iOS, it still would make little sense because it means rewriting everything and crippling your app because it will run slower on .net.

Edited 2011-12-28 03:40 UTC

Reply Score: 3

modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

WTF are you talking about?

Here is how app developers roll out their stuff:

1) hit iOS
2) Make a profit, then hit Android
3) since you are already making a profit, hit WinPho

If you plan to hit multiple platforms, then it makes sense to use a tool that lets you hit multiple platforms with the same code, so c# would make sense.

If your app is "crippled" by needing to use a runtime (what platform doesn't?) then you should rethink your ability to write software.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Not every bit as good.
by reduz on Wed 28th Dec 2011 14:59 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Not every bit as good."
reduz Member since:
2006-02-25

Yes, please question Unreal and Unity developer's ability to write software because their stuff won't run on a managed runtime. Maybe you should tell them this, since you obviously know their ability to write software better than they do..

Also, choice 3) is not a good idea unless you made a LOT of money with your app/game, the first two platforms can share the same codebase if you wrote everything using something like Unity or went C++. For WP you have to rewrite all your code and all your graphics stuff in DirectX. Why doing that if you can reinvest that money in another project?

Maybe I should also mention that I work as a consultant in game development and work with several small and medium sized companies. NO ONE develops for WP7 because not only it's not profitable but it requieres a completely different skill set to invest your company into, when most are happy using Unity or similar technologies..

Edited 2011-12-28 15:07 UTC

Reply Score: 6

RE[5]: Not every bit as good.
by lucas_maximus on Wed 28th Dec 2011 19:30 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Not every bit as good."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I think you are missing the point. Most mobile games aren't supposed to be Unreal 3 Engine jobs ... they are supposed to be quick and easy ... more like Worms or something along those lines.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Not every bit as good.
by TemporalBeing on Wed 28th Dec 2011 18:23 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Not every bit as good."
TemporalBeing Member since:
2007-08-22

WTF are you talking about?

Here is how app developers roll out their stuff:

1) hit iOS
2) Make a profit, then hit Android
3) since you are already making a profit, hit WinPho

If you plan to hit multiple platforms, then it makes sense to use a tool that lets you hit multiple platforms with the same code, so c# would make sense.

If your app is "crippled" by needing to use a runtime (what platform doesn't?) then you should rethink your ability to write software.


I'm actually going to be doing:

1. Target Android
2. Make some money
3. Target iOS
4. Make some more money
5. Reinvest in the company with the profits and move on

Yep, not interested in WP7 period; and my apps aren't anything dependent on special things like OpenGL either (e.g. not major games); however, I will have some native libraries shared between Android and iOS.

Reply Score: 3

modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

If you are targeting Android first then you are ignoring the fact that iOS is the platform where most of the profits are made in the mobile app space.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Not every bit as good.
by TemporalBeing on Thu 29th Dec 2011 14:16 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Not every bit as good."
TemporalBeing Member since:
2007-08-22

If you are targeting Android first then you are ignoring the fact that iOS is the platform where most of the profits are made in the mobile app space.


No. Just being realistic with what devices I have available to myself and the cost to entry.

iOS has a higher cost of entry for me - $99/yr plus I have to buy a device (iPad Touch, iPhone, or iPad).

I already have an Android device, and the cost to register into the market place is only $25 (one time).

So it's more a matter of practicality than anything else.

So while I do plan on targeting both, the order itself doesn't really matter.

And yes, the SDKs for both can be had for free.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Not every bit as good.
by lindkvis on Thu 29th Dec 2011 00:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Not every bit as good."
lindkvis Member since:
2006-11-21

Lolol!

I love developing for Windows Phone. Waaay better than Android.


That may well be, but professional software houses care less about how nice it is to develop for and more about what is going to give them the most sales for the least development effort.

And it just so happens that you can develop a core engine in C++, including OpenGL, to target both iOS and Android. You will have to develop some platform specific stuff on top of this (i.e. GUI in Objective-C for iOS), but depending on which type of app you are developing, you may be able to retain a considerable cross-platform engine.

Not so with WP7. Here you have to ditch almost everything and develop most of your app from scratch, because Microsoft refuses to support C++ and OpenGL.

It is a brain dead decision, that would work if and only if Microsoft was the dominant player in the smart phone market. This is not the case.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Not every bit as good.
by aaronmcohen on Wed 28th Dec 2011 03:18 UTC in reply to "Not every bit as good."
aaronmcohen Member since:
2011-09-19

It is a true that dot net developers who develop for Windows will be able to somewhat easily port to WP7. I say somewhat because majority of dot net applications include unmanaged code. Unfortunately this would have been helpful 4 years ago. We already have two code bases for Android and IOS. Adding a third for a platform that isn't popular yet is not really enticing. Well... unless you are Netflix and need to be on every platform under the Sun whether it is used or not.

WP7 does HTML 5 extremely well (minus a few things) and that is the only common development platform across all the mobile platforms. The funny thing is that IOS was originally intended for apps to be HTML only. The actual opening of the IOS APIs came later. So developing for WP7 via HTML may be more popular than dot net initially.

The best hope WP7 has to succeed is to be cheaper than the rest by a lot. Some people are willing to pay the Apple Premium and the rest are happy with Android. There is a lot of hope on Nokia. There are some really smart people working at Nokia but they seem to be on the defense right now.

On a side note I think the Mobile Metro UI needs to be pulled back a bit. It is neat but eventually gets annoying. Especially the full bleed canvases. As much as the IOS is ugly... my father can use it. WP7 c Anyone that claims it is the easiest UI can simply look at the book that comes with a WP7 Phone on how to use it. Compare that to the 7 page booklet that comes with the iPhone.

You may have noticed that I left out QNX and Blackberry OS.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Not every bit as good.
by modmans2ndcoming on Wed 28th Dec 2011 14:46 UTC in reply to "RE: Not every bit as good."
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

C# is common.... MonoTouch and Mono for Android Allow developers to write a single code base and compile to the correct platform.... and since you are already in Mono, converting to .net and XAML isn't too much work.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Not every bit as good.
by lucas_maximus on Wed 28th Dec 2011 19:31 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not every bit as good."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

be quiet ... you are ruining the rhetoric!

Reply Score: 2

RE: Not every bit as good.
by jbasko on Fri 30th Dec 2011 18:43 UTC in reply to "Not every bit as good."
jbasko Member since:
2009-03-17

Or is it just a matter of history i.e. who arrived first? If W7 and iOS landed the same time, I'd develop .NET over Objective C for sure. I've never coded an app for either platform, but the tooling from MS alone would definitely drive me there.

You might complain that you can't port your apps from Apple/Android to .NET. Yeah that's tough, but we know there's no silver bullet and this one isn't even wooden. But that might not be the aim. It's probably much easier to port and slim down an already existent desktop application to W7 though. Maybe, just maybe that's their angle...

Microsoft can build great products. People sometimes love to hate the big guy - maybe it's just human nature.

Reply Score: 1

RE: KPN is in the Netherlands?
by r_a_trip on Wed 28th Dec 2011 08:07 UTC in reply to "KPN is in the Netherlands?"
r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

you bet KPN is in The Netherlands. It used to be our old national telephone company.

Reply Score: 2

Does that mean...
by Narishma on Tue 27th Dec 2011 22:36 UTC
Narishma
Member since:
2005-07-06

...that Nokia is screwed?

Reply Score: 3

RE: Does that mean...
by gan17 on Tue 27th Dec 2011 22:43 UTC in reply to "Does that mean..."
gan17 Member since:
2008-06-03

I sure hope so. I bought the N9 to celebrate the life of a once great company. They're dead to me now.

Regarding WP7 phones. I wouldn't know if they're any good since I've never used one myself, but I guess it does have something to do with how MS are mandating everything.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Does that mean...
by Codester on Wed 28th Dec 2011 02:59 UTC in reply to "Does that mean..."
Codester Member since:
2008-10-24

"that Nokia is screwed?"

Nokia spent a lot of money (billions) on Symbian and Maemo/Meego and then walked away from both when Microsoft paid them a billion dollars to go solely with Windows Phone 7 on their smartphones. It didn't hurt that the CEO of Nokia had just come from a 2 year stint with Microsoft.

But their CEO has already said something regarding Windows Phone 7. I don't remember the exact quote but it was something like "If Windows Phone 7 doesn't take off, we're screwed". But I believe he added a sentiment that they were screwed if they didn't go to Windows Phone 7.

The really incredible part of it is that in October 2010 the head technical guy at Nokia proclaimed that Qt would be the only way to develop for Symbian/Meego in the future. Then a less than 4 months later Nokia chose probably the only OS that will never run Qt.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Does that mean...
by aaronmcohen on Wed 28th Dec 2011 03:36 UTC in reply to "RE: Does that mean..."
aaronmcohen Member since:
2011-09-19

I think Nokia will survive if WP7 does not. Essentially only a small amount of their high-end phones will us it. Symbian/S40 is not dead and it will be 5 years till MS can replace it on the low end. So there is still Nokia resources being pored into Symbian/S40 to defend 99.9% of their revenue. Developers are going to develop for what their target customers are using. The Specs for the Nokia Phones will probably work 100% with Android. If they don't get traction with WP7, I wouldn't be surprised if they extend the existing S40/Symbian SDK to work with Android. They have already acknowledge that this isn't possible with WP7 but is currently being done with Android. Yes there is WP7 migration documentation for QT and Java applications but you are are going to be rewriting nearly everything in the process.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Does that mean...
by Codester on Wed 28th Dec 2011 04:17 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Does that mean..."
Codester Member since:
2008-10-24

Nokia has decided to make all their smartphones WP7. They will still ship Symbian smartphones for a while, but their end of life is coming. It is hard to see a happy future for Nokia if Windows Phone 7 bombs. For the US market Nokia still has the problem that prior to Windows Phone 7, the only carrier which had a Nokia smartphone was T-Mobile and they only had one model. T-Mobile is the first US carrier to subsidize a Nokia WP7 phone, but will they get the other 3?

At the low end - below smartphone, or maybe just $150 or less in price - Nokia is planning on using an homegrown Linux-based OS which they are currently working on.

One thing is clear at this point - despite being the owner of Qt, Nokia has no intention to in any wayassist in getting Qt on WP7. In addition, I don't believe that Nokia is going to link up their OVI store/contacts/calendar/email to WP7. They are not doing much differently than if they were owned by Microsoft (they may be bought by Microsoft at fire sale prices at some point - with a big bonus going to Elop).

Reply Score: 2

RE: Does that mean...
by TemporalBeing on Wed 28th Dec 2011 18:26 UTC in reply to "Does that mean..."
TemporalBeing Member since:
2007-08-22

...that Nokia is screwed?


No. Their Billion dollar deal with Microsoft means they have to provide a few phones with WP7 on it; but it by no means means that they can only develop phones with WP7.

In fact, last I heard, that deal primarily affects that North American markets too...though I could be wrong.

In the end, wait for one of Microsoft's biggest shareholds to leave Nokia (e.g. CEO Stephen Elop) and then for the guy that replaces him to turn the ship again back to Symbian/MeeGo or even Android.

Reply Score: 4

MS Racket maybe?
by lidstah on Tue 27th Dec 2011 22:36 UTC
lidstah
Member since:
2008-09-20

Well, I bet some people here won't like what I'll say.
But if I was a phone maker, already paying Microsoft a fee for some bullshit patents, I won't, for sure, use their own phone operating system solution: I already give em' *enough* money for each Android phone I make and sell. And those are selling like hot cakes.

Reply Score: 4

v RE: MS Racket maybe?
by cetp on Tue 27th Dec 2011 22:42 UTC in reply to "MS Racket maybe?"
RE: MS Racket maybe?
by _txf_ on Tue 27th Dec 2011 22:49 UTC in reply to "MS Racket maybe?"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

Well, I bet some people here won't like what I'll say.
But if I was a phone maker, already paying Microsoft a fee for some bullshit patents, I won't, for sure, use their own phone operating system solution: I already give em' *enough* money for each Android phone I make and sell. And those are selling like hot cakes.


unfortunately MS charges the same amount for those BS patents as the whole Windows phone 7 license. In terms of monetary cost it is pretty much the same.

However, there are other non monetary costs (as you've said), the loss of the manufacturer brand, the loss of the phone model identity, and the cost of giving ms satisfaction.

As I've said many a time, no matter how good WP7 is, MS surely does not deserve to profit from it (since they profit of other things which they do not own and contribute nothing). I'd be perfectly happy for another competitor to join i.e. WebOS,bada,QNXed rim, anybody except MS.

Edited 2011-12-27 22:50 UTC

Reply Score: 7

As a consumer...
by Wodenhelm on Tue 27th Dec 2011 22:48 UTC
Wodenhelm
Member since:
2010-07-16

As a consumer, I finally have a choice, and these choices are equally on-par (in contrast with the home computer world, where Windows is on everything, Mac is stupid-expensive, and for the longest time, Linux was not a realistic option for users who dont wanna bother with command-line hackery).

And given the long history of having to deal with Windows, I most certainly chose NOT to go that route.

Reply Score: 6

RE: As a consumer...
by jonsmirl on Tue 27th Dec 2011 22:57 UTC in reply to "As a consumer..."
jonsmirl Member since:
2005-07-06

I too will never buy another Microsoft product again unless their monopoly forces me to. I have over thirty Windows licenses from various machines I have bought. How many can I use at once? Half those are from replacing Windows with Linux. And I still don't think I can legally load it into a VM even though I own thirty licenses.

Plus their sticking the phone makers with a patent fee equal to the price of the WinPhone7 license is going to make all of the OEMs hate them. BS software patents must die.

MS should just get on with acquiring Nokia which they will do sooner or later since they obviously have iPhone envy.

Go Android!

Edited 2011-12-27 22:59 UTC

Reply Score: 9

RE: As a consumer...
by David on Tue 27th Dec 2011 23:13 UTC in reply to "As a consumer..."
David Member since:
1997-10-01

I honestly think this a (probably minor) contributor to the lack of WP7 adoption. The Geek Elite haven't warmed to it because of bad blood. Even people who use Windows don't necessarily want to see Microsoft succeed, and certainly don't want to see it dominate in mobile, because the vibrant mobile ecosystem developed in large part thanks to Microsoft not being a player and being able to throw their weight around.

And even though the Geek Elite don't make up huge numbers compared to the larger mobile phone market, they have outsize influence on the adoption of new tech.

Just because something's in the store, doesn't mean people will buy it. For a few months, the Zune was all over the place, but that didn't make it successful. The influence that the carriers have is surely bigger than Best Buy's displays on potential Zune buyers, but if there were more enthusiasm for WP7 on the demand side, the carriers would come around.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: As a consumer...
by WorknMan on Wed 28th Dec 2011 02:19 UTC in reply to "RE: As a consumer..."
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

The Geek Elite haven't warmed to it because of bad blood. Even people who use Windows don't necessarily want to see Microsoft succeed, and certainly don't want to see it dominate in mobile, because the vibrant mobile ecosystem developed in large part thanks to Microsoft not being a player and being able to throw their weight around.


I rarely, if ever, make decisions based on which company I think is 'most evil', because there really is no such thing. All these companies care about is making money, and will screw you in the first instance where it makes business sense for them to do so.

Having said that, my reason for passing on WP7 is purely technical. As long as their phones are tethered to Zune, I will not even consider one. Even Apple, who caters mostly to tech tards, were smart enough to figure out the people shouldn't have to deal with a bloated media manager for updates and syncing files to/from their PC if they don't want to. And anybody who says Zune is better than iTunes, although you may be correct, it's like arguing that a pool of vomit is better than a pile of shit.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: As a consumer...
by modmans2ndcoming on Wed 28th Dec 2011 14:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: As a consumer..."
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

I like the Zune software and wish Zune had taken off because their subscription system for music made a lot more sense at the time....Now with Rdio, Spotify, etc all streaming music, subscription systems like those do not make sense as long as you are connected.

At any rate.... I would have picked the Winpho in September rather than the Galaxy S 4G if the models I saw had AMOLED and a 4 inch screen..... (as a side note... I am sad I got the SGS4G because CyanogenMod does not support it.)

Reply Score: 2

Nobody cares
by diegocg on Tue 27th Dec 2011 22:54 UTC
diegocg
Member since:
2005-07-08

So what if Windows Phone is good? It doesn't matter anymore, Android is "good enought", much like Dos and Windows 9X were "good enought".

Reply Score: 3

It's Payback Time for OEMs
by benali72 on Tue 27th Dec 2011 22:56 UTC
benali72
Member since:
2008-05-03

It's well known in the industry that Microsoft engaged in anti-competitive practices often at the expense of its OEM "partners". Now that those partners have other opportunities they're taking them. Good luck with Windows 8.

Reply Score: 6

wannabe geek
Member since:
2006-09-27

This is basically Microsoft propaganda from a former Microsoft employee who helped develop Windows Phone. There are some interesting points, but it should all be taken with a grain of salt.

He also thinks:

_ Users are sheep:

Users: Own the disposable income. They don’t know what they hate. All they know is they buy phone service from mobile carriers and/or buy a phone from a carrier. They love speeds & feeds and will generally buy anything they are told to by television ads and RSPs (Retail Sales Professionals).


_ Application developers are irrelevant (as to why a mobile phone OS succeeds or fails):

I’ve left off app developers. They are another side of this market, but for the point I am trying to make in this post I believe they are mostly irrelevant. For the record I believe apps are very important and app developers even more so. [EDIT: I updated this paragraph because it was clear some people mis-understood it.]



_ Removing options from the end user is a feature (but apparently he changed his mind?):

From

http://ceklog.kindel.com/2011/12/09/i-won-a-samsung-galaxy-s-ii-my-...

Windows Phone doesn’t even HAVE a setting for turning of GPS. It takes care of it for you.

Reply Score: 5

Comment by robojerk
by robojerk on Tue 27th Dec 2011 23:49 UTC
robojerk
Member since:
2006-01-10

I have zero experience/interest with WP7, so I'm not sure if this could even be done legally (licensing) or technically.

Could Microsoft release a free or very cheap "WP7 Basic", or "Basic Metro" OS that could work with existing ARM hardware (Nexus phones, Raspberry Pi, etc) to get developer/enthusiast interest?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by robojerk
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Wed 28th Dec 2011 05:46 UTC in reply to "Comment by robojerk"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Could Microsoft release a free or very cheap "WP7 Basic", or "Basic Metro" OS that could work with existing ARM hardware (Nexus phones, Raspberry Pi, etc) to get developer/enthusiast interest?


First. there is a HUGE gap between a Nexus vs a Rasberry. Its like saying "a vespa is like a ferrari,so couldn't they both be used to haul garbage?" They really are in different categories.

Second of all MS can pretty much release whatever software they like and call it what ever they want. Labels don't mean that much to them. However, the idea behind windows 7 was a consistant experience with identical devices with identical hardware that could be updated en masse. So it would cut against the grain of their efforts.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by robojerk
by TemporalBeing on Wed 28th Dec 2011 18:36 UTC in reply to "Comment by robojerk"
TemporalBeing Member since:
2007-08-22

I have zero experience/interest with WP7, so I'm not sure if this could even be done legally (licensing) or technically.

Could Microsoft release a free or very cheap "WP7 Basic", or "Basic Metro" OS that could work with existing ARM hardware (Nexus phones, Raspberry Pi, etc) to get developer/enthusiast interest?


Well, the Nexus branded devices are released in joint with Google, so I doubt the manufacturers would be able to put WP7 on them in any form, let alone provide enough information for Microsoft to do it. So those are likely a non-starter to boot. (It'd be like Microsoft going to Apple and saying put WP7 on your iPhone; not gonna happen, and I'm sure Google thought of that in their partnerships for the Nexus devices.)

As to other Android devices, it's a matter of whether the manufacturer wants to release either (1) WP7 drivers for Microsoft to use, or in the alternative (2) the specs for the hardware so Microsoft could make the drivers themselves.

#1 would probably be done only if Microsoft paid them a lot of money to do so; which probably isn't going to happen.

#2 is more likely, but then Microsoft would have to invest a lot more money into a floundering product to do the work themselves; and then have to accept responsibility when the devices fail to work for some reason (e.g. bricks the phone) as the manufacturers certainly won't as it would be officially unsupported by anyone but Microsoft, and well, I doubt any sane developer would try it in that scenario as a result - they want a working device.

That said, probably the majority of app developers are people that have done things on their own devices - people that may only ever make one app, kids, etc; people that won't be interested in installing a new OS that is unsupported over the existing one on the devices either.

So unless Microsoft can get sales up for WP7, their mobile presence is very well doomed.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by robojerk
by robojerk on Wed 28th Dec 2011 19:23 UTC in reply to "Comment by robojerk"
robojerk Member since:
2006-01-10

I was thinking more along the lines of a "Windows core" type of OS. Not a full WP7 OS/experience, but something for enthusiast/tinkerers to play with. Not necessarily putting WP7 on a Nexus phone (i just said Nexus since it;s more open and abundant than other ARM devices).

I think we're at the point where having a full OS in something as small as a watch is not only possible, but will almost be expected in the near future. Things like DVD/bluray players, TVs, cars, watches, etc... Android/Linux have a foot in the door already, yes there's Windows Embedded, but there are licensing costs involved, and not as free for development as Linux/Android.

I've seen metro UI, think it deserves a nod of recognition, but I will not support Microsoft anymore because of their past record, but at the same time I see a place for them in the future for devices like these, they just need to make it affordable (free, or close to it) for vendors, and build a revenue stream (besides litigation) around it.

Edited 2011-12-28 19:25 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Comment by zizban
by zizban on Tue 27th Dec 2011 23:49 UTC
zizban
Member since:
2005-07-06

Device makers saw what happened to the PC market and don't want a repeat of it in the mobile world.

Reply Score: 4

Comment by robojerk
by robojerk on Wed 28th Dec 2011 00:16 UTC
robojerk
Member since:
2006-01-10

I don't think the device makers care about that, they only care about making money.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by robojerk
by zizban on Wed 28th Dec 2011 00:19 UTC in reply to "Comment by robojerk"
zizban Member since:
2005-07-06

If the mobile world becomes like the PC world, they won't make anywhere near as much money as they do now.

Reply Score: 3

v Try it
by ccraig13 on Wed 28th Dec 2011 00:40 UTC
Comment by leos
by leos on Wed 28th Dec 2011 00:54 UTC
leos
Member since:
2005-09-21

The WP interface is innovative, and the execution is good, no doubt about it. I don't think the interface is as usable as that of the more traditional iOS/Android, but to each his own.
However it's also been around for a while, and I think it's just a matter of time before the best ideas are incorporated into the other mobile UIs.

So if the interface is no longer a draw, what is left for Windows phone? XBox will be a drive, and perhaps integration into the rest of the Microsoft ecosystem, but there are already apps out there for the other platforms that do that really well (interoperate with Office, sharepoint, etc).

The problem is that Microsoft is trying the Apple approach because it works so well for Apple. But the only reason it does is because Apple was first to market in that class, and people were willing to tolerate the limitations because the alternative was the old Windows Mobile and Blackberry devices. You can't come to market with a locked down, limited device when Apple has had 3 years to refine its model and accumulate staggering developer support, and Android has claimed the low end and ultimate flexibility market.

That said, I still hold some hope for Windows phone.. It is a decent product, so perhaps they will push through. It's a bit different than the Zune, because that was a market in decline already. The smartphone market will continue to expand and evolve for a long time to come.
I think we're better off with another platform out there. And as a microsoft shareholder I hope they get their shit together sometime too!

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by leos
by modmans2ndcoming on Wed 28th Dec 2011 15:00 UTC in reply to "Comment by leos"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

what is interesting is for most of the last decade I was screaming at MS because they could offer such a rich and integrated experience for users from the desktop, to mobile to the living room, but they had 3 versions of the same tool, incompatible ecosystems, etc....Now they are FINALLY choosing the winners in their company and making them all work together.

Reply Score: 2

Side comment about the Andoid updates
by ddc_ on Wed 28th Dec 2011 00:59 UTC
ddc_
Member since:
2006-12-05

I am a geeky Android user and I don't care the updates at all: I'm using my HTC Magic (which was officially updated only to 1.6, I think) running custom Android 2.3 ROM. But if I had to choose between my carrier's 2.3 ROM and a custom 2.3 mod, I wouldn't actually consider carrier's one. I just don't need that.

Reply Score: 1

B2G, etc.
by _xmv on Wed 28th Dec 2011 03:05 UTC
_xmv
Member since:
2008-12-09

I personally like better the "true-open" alternatives.

Like Boot2Gecko, or even to a lesser extend Meego (and whatever spinoff Intel made from it), or even maybe WebOS soon.

Android ain't all that open. And it shows: There's no decent "from source" ICS rom right now, except for phones Google released ICS for.

Is that because Google works faster? Nope. It's because the devs are stuck. It's because Android is not really open, not even really open source.

For example, the SGS2, which is probably the best and most well known *current* Android phone (even more than the Galaxy Nexus or the Nexus S).

Devs at CyanogenMod gave up on ICS until Samsung makes a release aleady. They just can't get the RIL (radio interface layer) working. It's a binary blob!

And that's the same for the camera, and tons of other drivers.

So basically, Android does not give you the freedom Linux distros give you on PC. Not even close to it.

Reply Score: 2

RE: B2G, etc.
by Yagami on Wed 28th Dec 2011 12:23 UTC in reply to "B2G, etc."
Yagami Member since:
2006-07-15

Yeah Right ...

Its nothing like the freedom that the NVIDIA Driver Binary Blog gives me on PC.

Nothing like...

Reply Score: 1

I think it is much simpler, really.
by adkilla on Wed 28th Dec 2011 03:15 UTC
adkilla
Member since:
2005-07-07

WP devices look the same with hardly any differentiation. You could just buy one from any WP manufacturer and not feel you've missed out on anything by not checking out the other options. It is not like there is a Galaxy SII variant of WP or RAZR variant of it either. They all use the same hardware. Even the same screen res. A dual core WP phone? Scratch that, its not going to happen till MS is ready, it's not like the hardware manufacturers could incorporate the needed software support into the WP kernel. So far only 2 kinds of ARM CPU chipsets are supported.

The Apple model works for Apple because: They have the most positive branding in the market. They make AND sell their own phones. They are not lagging behind the competition in terms of hardware specs and features.

WebOS has a great UI, MeeGo Harmattan has a great UI, but guess what, they are practically dead. MS may have a great UI in WP, but they are not great in pretty much everything else. Functionality? As compared to what, Symbian?

Android is doing well, because of a simple concept: significant choices and functionality. Want a dual core phone? Want a phone with a nice camera? Want a phone with 720p display? What a phone with different themes and UIs? Want 3G video calling? Just take your pick of the hundreds of choices out there. This is also the reason why it is toppling the iPhone for the #1 spot.

MS needs to bring what they have on the desktop currently to WP. Where manufactures and consumers have flexibility and choices. Unless the likes of Android rolls over and dies tomorrow, they don't stand much of a chance. Even Apple is being overwhelmed by this aspect of Android and using lawsuits to slow its growth.

I have a Nokia N9 and love Harmattan, though I could understand if Nokia abandoned it and moved to Android, but moving to WP is the most harebrained move they could ever make. They've not only lost their differentiation, they've also lost all of their significant market share. If you think at least the hardware in the Lumia 800 is the same as the N9, you are in for a surprise. The Lumia has a crappy GPS chip and none of the pentaband innovations in the N9. This is thanks to the MS hardware straitjacket imposed on all WP OEMs.

Reply Score: 6

modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

Let me just write a simple application targeting gingerbread... oh crap... There are so many hardware variations, how do I do cool feature X with out knowing if cool hardware y is on the phone?

Reply Score: 1

adkilla Member since:
2005-07-07

You should target devices based on the APIs and hardware capabilities that you need. Not based on OS generations. You wouldn't want to alienate users based on OS versions now do you? If you were actually a developer you would have known that.

Reply Score: 4

modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

Since we are throwing insults around:

If you were actually able to cogitate, you would have understood my point, that you accidentally allude to which is:

I want to write Cool Application A that will implement Cool Feature B that needs Cool Function C to operate....Great... so my application only functions on a subset of android devices.

If I am in the iOS world or the Windows Phone 7 world, I can write that application with out too much worry because the hardware feature set is pretty standard (camera apps do not work on an iPod Touch 3 or older for instance due to hardware restrictions).

Yes, in android I just need to query the appropriate services API to get the information I want, but until ICS my UI was not independent from the device resolution and screen sizes/resolutions are highly variable in the android world.

Reply Score: 2

adkilla Member since:
2005-07-07

Again, you claim to know development but don't even seem to know a simple skill that every developer on any platform knows. However, instead of attempting a long post to help you perceive a concept you clearly do not understand, I'll just repeat your contradictory statements in your comments to show your meaningless reasoning:

This statement:

I want to write Cool Application A that will implement Cool Feature B that needs Cool Function C to operate....Great... so my application only functions on a subset of android devices.

Contradicts with this statement:
If I am in the iOS world or the Windows Phone 7 world, I can write that application with out too much worry because the hardware feature set is pretty standard (camera apps do not work on an iPod Touch 3 or older for instance due to hardware restrictions).


You complain about disparate features in Android handsets but go on to admit that it does exist in platforms, by your definition, with standardized feature-sets? Do you see the inanity in your statements?

Inversely, are you expecting WP8 handsets not to improve in hardware feature-sets, so that they continue to stay standardized with WP7? No better GPUs or higher-res screens in the future to fragment the WP market? Well, lo and behold, if it does happen, there will the gnashing of the teeth and wailing by persons such as yourself claiming to be a developer.

Reply Score: 3

modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

It really is not contradictory....In the same generation and class of hardware on Android I have a multitude of hardware feature differences, in the iOS world the differences really only exist across device classes.

Reply Score: 2

adkilla Member since:
2005-07-07

Again, you are missing the point. Most of these iOS devices are upgradeable to the latest firmware and can run the latest applications. However, because the limitations of each device, some applications will work and some won't. So developers targeting iOS, must be aware of the differences and still decide what features they need. There is no magic to this. For example, on iOS, there are applications that won't work well on iPads unless the developers update their apps or release a separate version that works exclusively on iPads. The same goes for older generation iPhones.

All platforms have fragmentation, whether you choose to admit it or not. On Android, however, critics have been merely on overdrive about.

Reply Score: 2

WP7 is Good
by Hussein on Wed 28th Dec 2011 04:47 UTC
Hussein
Member since:
2008-11-22

I used WP7 and found it to be a doubleplusgood OS. I loved the live tiles and the metro UI. Maybe it is too alien to most users, I remember first time using my Zune HD I got kind of a UI shock for a full 30 seconds.

Why it didn't take off? The carriers are the main culprit here. Also OEMs push Android more and put Android on their top handsets. Microsoft needs to advertise! advertise! advertise!

WP7 is an epic mobile OS and I'll be a sad panda if it doesn't grow and prosper.

Reply Score: 1

RE: WP7 is Good
by modmans2ndcoming on Wed 28th Dec 2011 15:05 UTC in reply to "WP7 is Good"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

with Nokia building their smart phones with WinPho, I think it will solve the available hardware problem.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: WP7 is Good
by adkilla on Thu 29th Dec 2011 01:54 UTC in reply to "RE: WP7 is Good"
adkilla Member since:
2005-07-07

You may have more phones from different manufacturers, but the hardware is basically the same. The only possible value add that Nokia could provide is better camera algorithms and optics. Pretty much nothing else.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: WP7 is Good
by modmans2ndcoming on Thu 29th Dec 2011 02:30 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: WP7 is Good"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

Nokia's deal allows them much more latitude on the hardware.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: WP7 is Good
by adkilla on Thu 29th Dec 2011 04:01 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: WP7 is Good"
adkilla Member since:
2005-07-07

Until that actually happens color me unconvinced. Every WP handset they've announced and released lately does not differentiate from the competition significantly.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: WP7 is Good
by zima on Sat 31st Dec 2011 01:58 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: WP7 is Good"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

You may have more phones from different manufacturers, but the hardware is basically the same. The only possible value add that Nokia could provide is better camera algorithms and optics. Pretty much nothing else.

Yeah, just like it happened with PCs ...thing is, so what? Who cares about the internals if they're well into "good enough" & working smoothly?
(BTW, I wonder, what happened to all those unique computer platforms of the 80s and 90s?)

Marketing, fashion, existing carrier deals & relationships, brand loyalty, those too can be powerful differentiators in our world.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: WP7 is Good
by adkilla on Sun 1st Jan 2012 13:05 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: WP7 is Good"
adkilla Member since:
2005-07-07

If only "good enough" was key, we all would be satisfied with Symbian S60 or Windows Mobile 6.5. The success of Android and iOS has proven that this argument is flawed.

The PC market does not center on "good enough". It has many classes of devices for different computing needs. Else we all would be stuck with the limited choices on the Mac platform.

While the differentiations you've provided does have affect consumer decisions, you have left out other key differentiators that is features and options. On WP, these are severely lacking. Since all devices are practically the same, it doesn't give consumers better options available on other platforms.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: WP7 is Good
by zima on Tue 3rd Jan 2012 23:53 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: WP7 is Good"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Don't be disingenuous - the context here, also of your posts, is hardware on which WP7 runs. And despite your whining about it, that combination is already clearly well into "good enough" - possibly the smoothest experience right now (even despite "average" technical specs), at least as good as best results of other platforms (but those need much more powerful hardware for such results, essentially wasting it; coincidentally, WP7 handsets also seem to be very decent in battery life...)

For another mobile example: recently there are also quite a few people around who are marvelled at the smoothness of N9 Meego ...despite this being similarly "underpowered" & unremarkable hardware.
Plenty of such around, overall - CD (even DVD for many), mp3, FM radio, megapixels, speed of cars (unavoidable analogy ;p ), printer & scanner & lately display DPI. The specs are only means to something - and once they consistently manage to give pleasant results, people don't care so much about further spec bumps (and they certainly don't care about the "differentiating" geeky details)

The PC is an epitome of this for the last few years. Virtually any random laptop you can pick up will offer very smooth experience, likewise many machines which are even half a decade old. Usually, people wouldn't be able to tell (as in feel, not "look at FPS counter" and such) the difference in ~proper ABX test - I actually did it with two "hardware & OC enthusiasts", with the help of software to limit CPU speeds. Similar with sizes of RAM or HDD, or network speeds (I had for a year ~7 MB/s up&down - yes, that's megabytes - and honestly, dropping to something more than an order of magnitude slower is something without any real impact at all) - all those within the scope of "ecosystem of the times" of course...

...but, here's the best thing with mobile phones: they are an ~embedded thing, they can be much more harmoniously integrated, if there was a will (and/or means) to do that (or will you claim now that all software stacks and implementations are equally efficient?)

And sure, there's always some number of outliers (at the least staunch "enthusiasts" - but also, say, those who are always thirsty of ~PC CPU power in their more serious calculations), but they have little impact on something like mass adoption of a mobile platform.


Which brings us also firmly into "marketing, fashion, existing carrier deals & relationships, brand loyalty" (and Nokia still has plenty of those to draw from)


You pointing out in context examples of something "not good enough" - that is a flawed argument. They have no causative relation to, no impact on those different things which ARE "good enough" ...while providing the same class of features and options (except maybe, for the latter, mostly those which wouldn't make a difference), don't make stuff up.

Edited 2012-01-04 00:11 UTC

Reply Score: 2

WP7 is Windows Phone Seven
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Wed 28th Dec 2011 05:52 UTC
Bill Shooter of Bul
Member since:
2006-07-14

It is what it is, a microsoft idea implemented in windows fashion, resulting in a standard windows experience.

Now if you thought that was a compliment, you're right.
Now, if you thought that was an insult, you're right.

And there in lies the reason why its as successful as it is. People expect from a company what they've received from a company. It took apple years for people to take another look at their products after the slim beige software less crash machines they made in the 90's. And yet there was still a core that swore by them and everything they made. Nothing could convince them otherwise.

You're seeing the same thing now with Microsoft.

Reply Score: 4

Reviews
by OSGuy on Wed 28th Dec 2011 06:43 UTC
OSGuy
Member since:
2006-01-01

Yet, despite raving reviews and glowing user comments all over the web, Windows Phone 7 simply isn't selling.

How do we know that these glowing comments are not made by employees of Microsoft and Nokia? ;)

Either way, I hate WP7. I hate its limitations in general and I hate its GUI look. With Android, I don't need third party software to manage my phone and I can install any software I want.

Edited 2011-12-28 06:44 UTC

Reply Score: 5

I'm curious...
by Morgan on Wed 28th Dec 2011 07:56 UTC
Morgan
Member since:
2005-06-29

(Note: I'm being even more tedious and wordsy than usual so TL;DR: WP7 is awesome in my opinion, said opinion based on actual experience as opposed to speculation and rumor. Details below if you care to bother.)



How many people commenting here actually *own* a WP7 device? I don't mean played with one at the T-Mo store, I mean bought and are currently using one? I've owned one since November and it is now my only phone as I switched to a CDMA carrier. I know Thom owns one.

It seems to me there is a lot of misinformation and even flat out lying about the platform going around. I'll admit, I have to turn off my geeky hacker side to fully enjoy the device; after all I still have my rooted Nook Color to stroke my geek-ego with. But I feel it can't be said loud or often enough: As a phone, as a messaging device, as a social media hub, and as an entertainment device it is the best I've used in a very long time.

I've had every single smartphone platform out there since 2006, with the exception of WebOS (and I tested that one for a day; very nice). Starting with Palm Garnet, then moving through iPhone (before and during the iOS name change), Symbian, BlackBerry, WinMo6, Android, Maemo and now WP7, I can honestly say it's the first time since Palm Garnet that the OS gets the phone part right. In other words, this isn't a few KB of phone software slapped on a MID style device after the fact, this feels it was designed from the ground up to be a phone first and a mobile entertainment device second. As great as iOS is at making the iPhone work like a real phone, WP7 has the edge from what I've seen.

One great example, and something I didn't know about until I discovered it by accident just today: If you turn on a Bluetooth headset paired with the phone, all subsequent text messages received are automatically read to you via text-to-speech, and you are asked if you want to reply by voice recognition. You don't have to set up anything before or after, you don't have to buy any software, and you don't have to remember to turn it on, it just freaking works. This is where we should have been five years ago with the first iPhone! It's sad that the least innovative company out there would do such a seemingly small thing right when everyone else either gets it wrong or doesn't get it at all.

And that's not even my favorite feature; there's something else that seems to be common to WP7 devices no matter the manufacturer. The battery lasts nearly as long as a cheap feature phone! I get up to three days with moderate usage, which includes playing Youtube videos and even the occasional anime episode on Netflix. That's up to 72 hours, something I've not seen since the Palm Treo days. In fact, the only thing that seems to drain the battery visibly is a game called "Legends of Descent", a Rogue-like game that is fun but likely very inefficient code-wise.

So there you have it: The company who is third on my shit list after Sony and Apple now makes three great things I really enjoy having: Windows 7, the Xbox 360 and WP7. Whether the platform succeeds or ultimately fails, I will continue using it until I am forced to change. I honestly hope that day only comes because Microsoft comes out with something even better.

Edited 2011-12-28 08:03 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE: I'm curious...
by DDevine on Wed 28th Dec 2011 08:36 UTC in reply to "I'm curious..."
DDevine Member since:
2011-12-28

I absolutely agree. I am definitely an open source guy, but in a sea of closed-source phones I figured it didn't particularly matter which one I chose. However, you do need Windows and the Zune app to update WP7 ;)

I got my refurbished LG C900 WP7 phone for $150 AUD and its waaaayyy nicer than any Android phone I could find at that price. Microsoft has actually done a good job with WP7 - stripping out all the legacy crap has done wonders and I like the Metro style.

The only thing I miss from my old (slow) Android phone is wireless hotspot. This hasn't been so bad because the screen is big enough that I can actually browse sites on my phone instead of breaking out the laptop.

Don't knock it till you try it.

I've looked into developing HTML5/JavaScript apps for WP7 (and they should be portable to Windows 8 if you care) and it looks dead simple!

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: I'm curious...
by Morgan on Wed 28th Dec 2011 09:10 UTC in reply to "RE: I'm curious..."
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

However, you do need Windows and the Zune app to update WP7


You can update it on a Mac too, the Windows Phone 7 Connector works just fine from what I've seen. It also syncs well with iTunes.

I got my refurbished LG C900 WP7 phone for $150 AUD and its waaaayyy nicer than any Android phone I could find at that price. Microsoft has actually done a good job with WP7 - stripping out all the legacy crap has done wonders and I like the Metro style.


I got mine for free via an Amazon promotion, and to be honest the price was what pushed me over the edge. I had been considering the platform for a while, but I couldn't justify paying $100 or more plus a new contract. When I decided to leave T-Mobile and I saw that deal for Sprint, I jumped on it. Now that I've had the phone for a while I think I would have been fine with paying something up front though.

The only thing I miss from my old (slow) Android phone is wireless hotspot. This hasn't been so bad because the screen is big enough that I can actually browse sites on my phone instead of breaking out the laptop.


Same here, my Nook misses the Barnacle wifi tether I had with the buggy old Android phone, but the screen on the Windows phone just seems to be perfect for web browsing. The pages render beautifully and even when the fonts are very small they are still quite readable. I doubt I'll ever see any tethering on my device; as Sprint is the last US carrier to maintain truly unlimited data plans, they would never agree to a tethering app in the first place. I know that similar WP7 phones on the other carriers were supposed to get it with Mango but it ended up being very hardware dependent. If I ever do see it on Sprint, it will be on a newer phone.

I've looked into developing HTML5/JavaScript apps for WP7 (and they should be portable to Windows 8 if you care) and it looks dead simple!


I may have to look into that too; scripting languages like Javascript are about as close as I come to "real" programming. I did look at the TouchDevelop...thing, and it's a gimmick as far as I'm concerned. It's pretty much all at the interface level, without any real substance or back end.

To be honest, there really aren't any productivity features I'm missing from the device vs Android. As for entertainment, all I want is a good RPG or two and I'm set. Netflix and Youtube have me covered on video watching for anything I don't just copy over via the Zune connector.

Reply Score: 2

I hate Metro.
by vtolkov on Wed 28th Dec 2011 08:09 UTC
vtolkov
Member since:
2006-07-26

All I can say is that I clearly understand why people do not like it. There is no conspiracy required. If other people like me, why not, really? I just hate the interface. No, I do not own device. Why would I? I've tried using it, read a lot, I was looking at the screenshots, I was reading positive reviews, etc. It is possible to use, if I would force to, but I have an opinion: I hate it.

The same will be about Windows 8, I expect. The apps in preview looks awful.

Reply Score: 2

RE: I hate Metro.
by Morgan on Wed 28th Dec 2011 09:22 UTC in reply to "I hate Metro."
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

That's exactly how I felt about the old WinMo interface. No matter how much I tried to like it, no matter how many hours I spent learning it, I never could get it to behave long enough to get anything done. I think Microsoft finally started listening to the end users instead of their own engineers, and they came up with something (in my opinion, of course) elegantly simple with WP7. And as with anything else, it's not for everybody.

I've always felt that one should use the tool that works for them instead of trying to bend themselves to the tool's will. With that said, I'm curious: What is your mobile platform of choice?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: I hate Metro.
by _txf_ on Wed 28th Dec 2011 10:51 UTC in reply to "RE: I hate Metro."
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

I think Microsoft finally started listening to the end users instead of their own engineers, and they came up with something (in my opinion, of course) elegantly simple with WP7.


I highly doubt that they listened to end users. End users would have told them to remake iOS or Android. Metro seems to be designed top-down. Not that i'm knocking their approach.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: I hate Metro.
by Morgan on Wed 28th Dec 2011 15:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I hate Metro."
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

You know, I don't really think so. Metro is so radically different from what Microsoft is used to doing. If you compare the current Windows desktop metaphor to Android and iOS, it's really not all that different. You have icons, you click on them, they open windows (granted, full screen but still a "windowed" interface). People may be used to that, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's what they want. After all, WinMo6 and previous are basically clones of the Windows desktop and they are a miserable failure in the ease of use department.

With Metro, instead of icons on a background you have live tiles, which can relay a lot of information without even being opened. And once you do open a tile, it's not just an app it's actually a workflow using several apps in the background, tied together to complete a task. There is still the "app for a task" metaphor going on in a few areas, especially third party software, but I feel that Microsoft of all entities is actually moving in the right direction towards a workflow/document centric metaphor and away from their own outdated and dying application centric metaphor.

The reason I say they are listening to users rather than engineers is in the simplicity of it all. Sure, anyone can use the Windows desktop (and by extension, the old Windows Mobile OS) for the base tasks, but what happens the first time someone's computer goes haywire? If they are not tech-savvy themselves, they call someone like you or me to fix it. Someone who may or may not be an engineer, or at the very least a geeky amateur hacker. Especially in the phone arena, people want it to just freaking work and work right, no tinkering necessary. It's one of the things Apple does so very well, and I think for once Microsoft is outdoing them when it comes to the user experience.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: I hate Metro.
by vtolkov on Wed 28th Dec 2011 22:37 UTC in reply to "RE: I hate Metro."
vtolkov Member since:
2006-07-26

I'm curious: What is your mobile platform of choice?


I would prefer iOs, but I use Android, just because of the cheep plan from Virgin Mobile. Android is somehow Ok, it has hotspot support, so I can use it for my notebook. It has also Google services, which is nice, and SD card support, so I keep a subversion repository on it. No much love though, I miss visual polishing of my iPad's interface. I do not like iPhone hardware much, because of its heavy glass design.

With WP7, I think, they combined negative sides of iOs and Android. It is closed like iOS, so no hotspot or native development. It has a heavy runtime, so low battery life and long app start. It has a strange UI, going against people expectations, no hints, no zones, no backgrounds, just strangely sized fonts. I do not understand people who designed the UI. I'm clearly from another planet.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: I hate Metro.
by vtolkov on Wed 28th Dec 2011 22:45 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I hate Metro."
vtolkov Member since:
2006-07-26

I want to add also, that I think, the goal of WP7 was to make a different UI. Not a better UI, but a different one. MS succeeded in that, so they got love from some gadget lovers who was waiting for something new and distinguishably different. But the majority of users wanted something useful and familiar and they were not appreciated efforts.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: I hate Metro.
by Morgan on Thu 29th Dec 2011 00:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I hate Metro."
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Okay, so most of the negative points you mentioned could be considered personal preference. That's perfectly fine. But two things you critiqued tell me quite clearly you either have no clue what you're talking about, or you are intentionally being misleading.

You said the OS suffers from short battery life and "long app start" which I assume means a lag between tapping a tile and the app launching. I regularly get two to three full days on a charge with moderate use. I can kill it in 20 hours if I really try, but that requires keeping the screen on constantly and always doing something with the device. That is unrealistic for most people's use cases. The last smartphone I had that could come close was a Symbian based Nokia Nuron, and I would have to charge it the second night. Before that it was the Palm Treo that would get me through three solid work days between charges. All other smartphones I've owned had to be charged no less than every 12 hours.

In the nearly four weeks I've had this phone, I have yet to experience any UI lag or slow launching apps. In fact, I'd put it a few notches above the MyTouch 4G and my Nook Color with LauncherPro in the fluidity and responsiveness areas.

I hope this helped clear up any misinformation you were subject to. ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: I hate Metro.
by vtolkov on Thu 29th Dec 2011 01:22 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: I hate Metro."
vtolkov Member since:
2006-07-26

Okay, so most of the negative points you mentioned could be considered personal preference.

Probably it is. But many people share it. I prefer houses with rooms and rooms with cozy furniture and soft light. And I prefer walls painted with light pattern and my chair and a bookshelf. But Metro is cold. It gives me no walls, no living zones, but some black space with transparent floor parts moving in unknown directions, and huge writings readable only from space are flying above. And sharp rectangles. I feel cold and uncomfortable.

But two things you critiqued tell me quite clearly you either have no clue what you're talking about, or you are intentionally being misleading.

Wel, maybe it was improved in Mango. And, right, as a developer, I have some prejudice about thick frameworks like Silverlight or Java. They waste too much cycles, they can't work other way.

Reply Score: 2

WM7
by Raziel on Wed 28th Dec 2011 08:53 UTC
Raziel
Member since:
2006-03-27

Whining MVPs 7 days a week

Reply Score: 1

dizzey
Member since:
2005-10-15

I dont know if this holds true for the win7 phones, but im scared to buy one since the CE area.

When Microsoft made the CE devices they did the oposite of the desktop version no backward compability at all.

If you bought a 5.0 device you where screwed within a year when they released newer versions of CE you could not run apps for newer versions and they wanted you to scrap you old phone and buy a new.

with ios and android i know the phone will be uasable for 3years

Reply Score: 2

Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Looking backwards from now? Nope, not a bit of compatibility with WinMo6 and earlier, and for a good damn reason!

As for the future, well the vast majority of internet oracles here are already claiming the platform will be dead very soon, and they may be right. But if they are wrong, I would hope there would be good support for WM7 in WM8; there's no reason not to do so on Microsoft's part.

Reply Score: 2

no, no, no...
by kovacm on Wed 28th Dec 2011 10:50 UTC
kovacm
Member since:
2010-12-16

no, no, no... problem for Microsoft (and luck for us, users) is that everybody today know what is Microsoft and how they do business!
no one want to have deal with company that develop "embrace extend extinguish" business model!

beside, we all saw long line of all microsoft failures during 10+ years:

starting with MIRA/tablet computing, wma/wmv/play for sure/zune line, and in last few months: silverlight...

how much money Microsoft partners lose betting on these crazy M$ standards/initiative/adventures?

(to be honest, there is only one valid business for microsoft (beside Windows/Office/Server monopoly from 90s) - it is Xbox)

anyway, I hope that we all say soon goodbye to worst company EVER in short IT history!

for anybody who would like to replay to this post, let me quote Douglas Adams about Microsoft:

"The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armour to lead all his customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores the fact that it was he who by peddling second-hand, second-rate technology, led them all into it in the first place."

Reply Score: 2

RE: no, no, no...
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 28th Dec 2011 10:53 UTC in reply to "no, no, no..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

no, no, no... problem for Microsoft (and luck for us, users) is that everybody today know what is Microsoft and how they do business!
no one want to have deal with company that develop "embrace extend extinguish" business model!


...oh the irony of an Apple user posting this. Dear gods.

Reply Score: 4

v RE[2]: no, no, no...
by kovacm on Wed 28th Dec 2011 14:19 UTC in reply to "RE: no, no, no..."
RE[3]: no, no, no...
by Morgan on Wed 28th Dec 2011 15:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: no, no, no..."
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

I think what he meant was, they are both despicable companies due to their business practices. To lambast Microsoft for being dicks while ignoring Apple's abhorrent treatment of other companies as well as their own users, is quite hypocritical.

Take it from someone who grew up using both Macs and PCs, who has felt simultaneously awed and disgusted by both companies: They both suck beyond words.

That doesn't change the fact that they put out great software (Apple for a long time now, Microsoft most recently). But please don't put one on a higher pedestal than the other; they are both deserving of our scorn.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: no, no, no...
by kovacm on Thu 29th Dec 2011 09:43 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: no, no, no..."
kovacm Member since:
2010-12-16

I think what he meant was, they are both despicable companies due to their business practices...


no.

I told Thom Why Hasn't Windows Phone 7 Taken off - because of Microsoft heritage. for past 30 years they did not do one good thing!

D. Adams describe it best ;)

"The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armour to lead all his customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores the fact that it was he who by peddling second-hand, second-rate technology, led them all into it in the first place."

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: no, no, no...
by Morgan on Thu 29th Dec 2011 11:08 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: no, no, no..."
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Yet somehow the fact that Apple does make great software, and has for many years, completely absolves them of all their wrongdoing that happens to be on par with Microsoft's shenanigans? That's quite the hypocritical, one-sided viewpoint if I may say so.

Please find a new reality, because it's obvious the one you are in is full of holes and paradoxes. It's the only explanation...

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: no, no, no...
by kovacm on Fri 30th Dec 2011 10:49 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: no, no, no..."
kovacm Member since:
2010-12-16

Yet somehow the fact that Apple does make great software, and has for many years, completely absolves them of all their wrongdoing that happens to be on par with Microsoft's shenanigans? That's quite the hypocritical, one-sided viewpoint if I may say so.

Please find a new reality, because it's obvious the one you are in is full of holes and paradoxes. It's the only explanation...


what Apple and Microsoft have in common ?

what Apple do "wrong" or same as Microsoft. Please enlighten me ;)

Reply Score: 0

v RE: no, no, no...
by Wafflez on Wed 28th Dec 2011 10:55 UTC in reply to "no, no, no..."
RE[2]: no, no, no...
by ricegf on Wed 28th Dec 2011 11:59 UTC in reply to "RE: no, no, no..."
ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

An Apple fan, actually. Projecting much? :-D

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: no, no, no...
by testman on Thu 29th Dec 2011 13:58 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: no, no, no..."
testman Member since:
2007-10-15

Judging by his avatar, I'd say he's an Atari zealot. They're everywhere these days.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: no, no, no...
by kovacm on Fri 30th Dec 2011 10:54 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: no, no, no..."
kovacm Member since:
2010-12-16

Judging by his avatar, I'd say he's an Atari zealot. They're everywhere these days.

yes, we use Mouse in 1985. while PC lusers wait 10 years for Microsoft to finally copy "magic" technology ! ;)

(and than waiting for some more years to mouse pointer on screen become silk smooth like on 1985. computers...)

Reply Score: 0

viruses?
by NuxRo on Wed 28th Dec 2011 11:01 UTC
NuxRo
Member since:
2010-09-25

"Why Hasn't Windows Phone 7 Taken off?"

Because we all know Windows has bugs and viruses, who would want this on their phone?!?

Indeed, as noted in the article, Microsoft should get away from the Windows name. Windows 7 is good, for a windows release, but it's not the holy grail.

Reply Score: 0

RE: viruses?
by Morgan on Wed 28th Dec 2011 15:58 UTC in reply to "viruses?"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Yeah because the x86/x64 WinTel codebase is exactly the same as the ARM-based WP7.

You're not even trying!

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: viruses?
by fifthecho on Thu 29th Dec 2011 17:43 UTC in reply to "RE: viruses?"
fifthecho Member since:
2007-11-07

But he has a point.
The "Windows" name is tarnished in that people associate it with the desktop OS.
Rather than being "Windows Phone 7" it should've been "Microsoft Metro 1" and then the negative connotations of the "Windows" name related to malware, viruses, and blue-screens wouldn't be there.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: viruses?
by Morgan on Thu 29th Dec 2011 19:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: viruses?"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

I agree, it would have been better to call it "Metro", but I think they are actually hoping the phone will be so successful that it will prop up the "Windows" name and lend legitimacy to the brand moving forward.

Of course, for that to happen they will need to really push to get WP7 out there and continue to make positive revisions to it instead of backsliding like RIM did with the Playbook's OS. Microsoft has a potential gold mine in this, but they are famous for major flops from the 90s and early 2000s. They need this platform to succeed, no doubt about it.

Reply Score: 2

Late?
by martini on Wed 28th Dec 2011 13:26 UTC
martini
Member since:
2006-01-23

I'm not really sure about being late.

Sure, WP7 timing wasn't complete right, but I thought that Android was also late. Blackberry and iPhone was already on the market when Android was released. I thought it was already too late, but Android installed base rise.

I also thought that the Xbox was late and didn't fit on the market.

So, I'm not sure about the "late" term to be definitive.

But I think that WP7 is failing against Android because of what Thom exposed. The hardware manufactures has control over it. This is mostly because it is open source and manufacturer don't feel 100% tied to Google. You can even hire other teams to compile a custom Android for you hardware device. So phone manufacturers feel the vendor independence that open source preaches.

Maybe it is the first time we can see the advantages of an open source project (Android) that was released before a close source alternative (WP7).

Reply Score: 3

They just make really third rate products
by mlankton on Wed 28th Dec 2011 14:02 UTC
mlankton
Member since:
2009-06-11

As an operating system/mobile enthusiast, is there really anything about any Microsoft os that gets you excited? Me neither.

Reply Score: 1

REM2000 Member since:
2006-07-25

Im not saying this to have an argument or anything, i like to consider myself platform agnostic with a personal preference to Apple kit. I mean agnostic in that if someone wants a laptop i wouldn't automatically say get a macbook pro when a £400 win7 laptop would suit their needs.

I would say that you are missing out a lot if you don't follow windows system developments. In particular any lecture or videos from Mark Russovich, they are incredibly with fascinating insights into both Windows OS and general OS development. However i think you'd be surprised at the actual great stuff Microsoft does do in their OS's.

Channel 9 and the Win7 / 8 blogs are a great place to start as are the system internals site.

I found the video from Mark regarding thread locking across 256 Core's / CPU's fascinating as well as the work done on the NTFS file system, which i consider the second best FS after ZFS with FAT32 and HFS+ at the bottom end of the FS spectrum.

The work on Memory reduction, the 64bit workings to get 32bit apps to work well with WOW layer.

I will admit there are parts of Windows which could have been a lot better, the standard user admin/elevated user process should have been developed better from NT 3.51 instead of the hack of running standard accounts as administrators. Some of the legacy stuff could be removed and also i hate the registry, it's stable in Win7 but having config / ini files would have been a lot easier, especially for backing up apps/software and restoring it.

However what i would recommend is to separate the company from the OS, ignore Microsoft and their business practices, focus on the OS, you don't have to use it to find the workings fascinating and quite educational.

Reply Score: 2

mlankton Member since:
2009-06-11

The reason I'm not a fan is the inferior user experience and the arcane administration (compared to unix systems). Not an MS hater, just haven't thought any of their products were compelling enough to use.

I will say that I absolutely hate the interface of the Xbox 360. The PS3 has a clean, easy to use interface. The 360 user experience is a mess.

Reply Score: 0

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

The reason I'm not a fan is the inferior user experience and the arcane administration (compared to unix systems). Not an MS hater, just haven't thought any of their products were compelling enough to use.

I will say that I absolutely hate the interface of the Xbox 360. The PS3 has a clean, easy to use interface. The 360 user experience is a mess.


God I hate the PS3 interface. Inconsistent, disorganised, hard to navigate, and totally not designed as a 3m interface. I can never find anything on the PS3.

Reply Score: 2

mlankton Member since:
2009-06-11

and the unintuitive hierarchy of the 360 os represents a better user experience to you? This is why MS is still in business, because a lot of people just don't seem to care.

Reply Score: 1

Comment by AnythingButVista
by AnythingButVista on Wed 28th Dec 2011 14:59 UTC
AnythingButVista
Member since:
2008-08-27

Hmm, where do I start? Lets see...

1. Screwing up your user base is a bad move!
Microsoft abandoned the very capable and feature-packed Windows Mobile OS which only needed a true UI overhaul, for something unappealing and lacking many features of their previous OS. They thought that just because Apple was able to release a phone without multitasking, copy & paste and native code app support, and get away with it, that they were going to be able to get away with that too. The result? Most hardcore Windows Mobile users and developers migrated to Android instead of WP7.

2. Fragmentation isn't that bad after all!
Microsoft's strict hardware requirements set to prevent fragmentation have really backfired on them. By not being able to target the entry-level market, Android has taken over and built a solid user base. You really think those users who got their feet wet in the smartphone waters with Android will have Windows Phone in mind when graduating to a more advanced device?

Also, by not providing a chassis with proper hardware keyboard support, Microsoft has lost on gaining customers from that sinking ship known as BlackBerry. WP7 devices with a keyboard are rare and they feel like the keyboard is an afterthought with stunts like not having proper landscape support or lacking keyboard shortcuts.

Finally, all WP7 devices look the same, be them from HTC, Samsung, LG or even Nokia. Having all these devices with the same look isn't a good idea when not everybody likes said look.

Reply Score: 2

Hard times for MS/Nokia
by siki_miki on Wed 28th Dec 2011 15:16 UTC
siki_miki
Member since:
2006-01-17

For all it's greatness under the hood and limited but well polished features, it is too little-too late for Microsoft. If they released this in Fall 2009, it would be a competition to iPhone, and maybe prevent Android taking up, but it didn't happen. People quickly adopted the iOS paradigm imitation that is Android, and now there's no (massive) going back to something as weird and as different as the WP7, even if it is smooth as butter. Granted, for the crowd which never liked iOS/Android it's an interesting option, for example to migrate from Symbian - and the the battery life is decent (unlike Android), so it's a logical transition. However young generations who love their Android/i-toys aren't going to buy these things too often.

Reply Score: 2

Windows Phone will fail because..
by reduz on Wed 28th Dec 2011 15:20 UTC
reduz
Member since:
2006-02-25

It's called Windows Phone.

Google and Apple are companies that invested a lot to make your life better (or at least make you believe that)

It may not be true and they are in it for the profit, but they put a lot of effort and money on that.

Microsoft comes from computers, and computers are hard to use for most people, are plagued with viruses, break often and definitely are not "cool". Large part of this is Microsoft's fault too, they screwed up security for a long time and several windows versions were terrible.

So it all comes down to "Windows" being a negative brand.

Reply Score: 4

Microsoft unique????? YGTFBKM!!!
by krreagan on Wed 28th Dec 2011 15:29 UTC
krreagan
Member since:
2008-04-08

"Let's hope so - we need competition from a truly unique player, instead of iOS and Android"

You've gone off your rocker... Calling M$ unique is like calling the Yankees a bush-league baseball team. They are very typical of a monopolistic player trying to force their way into a market they are ill-equipped to be in. I had to read this several times to make sure I was not missing something. One of the last thing M$ is, is unique. Over the past decade or more the only thing they have been unique at is burning the money in its pocket with no true successes other then perhaps Xbox and that was strictly a muscle play, not an innovation or uniqueness one.

Reply Score: 3

I agree & 100% ack
by kragil on Wed 28th Dec 2011 15:44 UTC
kragil
Member since:
2006-01-04

The "Windows" name sucks big salty donkey balls for a "consumer" product. It is way too uncool and everyone just thinks of virii, crashes and crapware or even worse.
Metro would have been a better name. Just imagine the Xbox would have been named "Windows Console XP"

It was doomed from the start. But I hope MS will pump a few more billions into it for years, like the do with bing. That will make their stock price drop even more.

Reply Score: 3

RE: I agree & 100% ack
by zima on Sat 31st Dec 2011 01:51 UTC in reply to "I agree & 100% ack "
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

... But I hope MS will pump a few more billions into it for years, like the do with bing. That will make their stock price drop even more.

Or they will largely take over the momentum of the market, like they did with xbox, eventually.

Reply Score: 2

I can tell you this...
by Tuishimi on Wed 28th Dec 2011 16:24 UTC
Tuishimi
Member since:
2005-07-06

...when I went shopping for my Windows 7 Phone, the store acted like "oh, that? Windows 7? HEY! What about this shiney Android phone over here!"

They pushed iPhone and Android phones and really didn't want to show me the WP7 phones... in fact they didn't even have one of the models in-store. I was very disappointed with T-Mobile at that time. Still, I have an iPhone and Windows phone and honestly? I am planning on giving my iPhone 4S to my wife and using her credit coming next month to get a new windows phone. It just feels more natural to me.

The drawback is that is with AT&T and I will lose my unlimited data with T-Mobile. :/

Reply Score: 2

RE: I can tell you this...
by n4cer on Thu 29th Dec 2011 03:47 UTC in reply to "I can tell you this..."
n4cer Member since:
2005-07-06

...when I went shopping for my Windows 7 Phone, the store acted like "oh, that? Windows 7? HEY! What about this shiney Android phone over here!"

They pushed iPhone and Android phones and really didn't want to show me the WP7 phones... in fact they didn't even have one of the models in-store. I was very disappointed with T-Mobile at that time. Still, I have an iPhone and Windows phone and honestly? I am planning on giving my iPhone 4S to my wife and using her credit coming next month to get a new windows phone. It just feels more natural to me.

The drawback is that is with AT&T and I will lose my unlimited data with T-Mobile. :/


Depending on your situation, you may want to check out http://www.mysimplemobile.com/

They're a T-Mobile MVNO (so you can use your existing Windows Phone). You can get unlimited voice, text, and data for less than either AT&T or T-Mobile ($40 for 3G speeds / $60 for 4G speeds). No contract/PAYG. I switched to them from T-Mobile around the launch of WP7 because T-Mobile chose to raise their rates at that time (also jailbroke a friend's iPhone to run on their network [only 2G speeds] -- they later got a Windows Phone as well [HTC Radar 4G]). You may have to use your OEM-supplied configuration app to setup MMS/web. Possible downside is, if you really want a new phone, you'll have to get an unlocked one (they don't offer subsidized devices), but the overall savings may be worth it (was for me). Other downsides of Simple Mobile -- no tethering, conference calling, or visual voicemail, so may not be for you if those are important.

Last I checked, there wasn't an AT&T MVNO that allowed you to use your own device. There may be one, but I don't know of any. There was only one at the time that had a N900 as their only GSM phone. You could potentially get that phone, then use the SIM in another, but it was unsupported (and against their TOS, IIRC) and I didn't feel like risking it.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: I can tell you this...
by Tuishimi on Thu 29th Dec 2011 04:13 UTC in reply to "RE: I can tell you this..."
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

Wow! Thanks for all the info!

Reply Score: 2

Why Hasn't Windows Phone 7 Taken off?
by djrikki on Wed 28th Dec 2011 17:43 UTC
djrikki
Member since:
2011-09-02

I think the answer to the news item is quite simple and has already been mentioned a number of times already.

Microsoft has never been associated with being 'cool', its widely known beyond the sphere of savvy-computer users that Microsoft is an evil monopoly that reached where it is now through illegal business practises with next to no government intervention. Of course the overall security problems of Windows have plagued users for decades, viruses, malicious software and the ilk - simplistcally no wants to be in the middle of the phone call and have their phone perform a reboot.

On the desktop if Microsoft begins to lose market share - I am fairly certain I won't be the only one to see this as good news for the entire industry. The people must have choice and its not being given to them.

Discover AmigaOS - www.amigaos.net

Reply Score: 1

Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Wed 28th Dec 2011 17:46 UTC
shmerl
Member since:
2010-06-08

Proprietary closed system with too many restrictions can't compete on the crowded market these days. The only reason iOS manages to do it, is because it's already here with a big developer / user base. For newcomers, only open and flexible ones will succeed IMO. Windows Phone without available C/C++ compiler and heavy dark empire looming in background is doomed to fail.

Reply Score: 3

Why its failing
by nikcomp on Wed 28th Dec 2011 19:53 UTC
nikcomp
Member since:
2011-12-28

Windows Mobile Phone 7 would be every bit as competitive "if" Microsoft released the front end of the OS. Android allows Touchwiz and Sense interfaces that allow the manufactures the ability to create distinction so you know its a Samsung, HTC or motorola. Microsoft since Windows doesn't allow this. I understand Microsoft wants to "control" the support aspect of their OS , but in closed devices that have very few updates, the OEM's would much rather control the front end views and services. Even if the costs are the same or Microsoft is lower the OEM's will have a hard time not wanting their own front end. Nokia is their "only" chance.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Why its failing
by shmerl on Wed 28th Dec 2011 20:01 UTC in reply to "Why its failing"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

Nokia won't help Windows Phone. In result Microsoft will only hurt Nokia (as they already did for Meego).

Reply Score: 2

But what did it bring to the table?
by seishino on Wed 28th Dec 2011 21:20 UTC
seishino
Member since:
2005-09-10

To break into a tech sector, you don't just have to be better. You have to bring a unique selling point that is strong enough to overcome the associated costs of switching. Apple brought a huge leap forward in usability. Android brings an openness, flexibility, broad availability, and dirt cheapness. Windows Phone 7 brings... ceramic tiles.

Microsoft marketed the hell out of MSN, and that went nowhere because it brought nothing new. Windows Phone 7 is a totally solid phone. But there isn't a reason for it. Getting over years of installed ipod cradles, android-compatible everythings, and apps written for these two platforms, is a big hurdle. Windows Phone, so far, seems like a corporate cash-in rather than a product that humanity needed to create.

Reply Score: 2

50,000
by martini on Wed 28th Dec 2011 22:48 UTC
martini
Member since:
2006-01-23

They just announced they reached the 50,000 apps mark on the app store.

http://allaboutwindowsphone.com/news/item/13913_Windows_Phone_Marke...

Now they need to add an extra zero to the right to reach the +500K Google and Apple has.

Reply Score: 1

RE: 50,000
by shmerl on Wed 28th Dec 2011 23:05 UTC in reply to "50,000"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

As if that number really means anything.

Reply Score: 3

Reality distortion field.
by helix on Thu 29th Dec 2011 00:59 UTC
helix
Member since:
2011-08-04

I work at a small regional carrier, and I don't think my customers care one iota whether Microsoft and Apple are evil companies that have used questionable, if not illegal business practices in the past. We sell Dell Venue Pro phones right alongside the iPhone and numerous Android phones, and they just don't appeal to our customers as much. It will be interesting to see how the sleeker Nokia phones do, but customers seem to want one of two things: Android, or iPhone. That might change someday, but that's the way it is right now.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Reality distortion field.
by shmerl on Thu 29th Dec 2011 01:50 UTC in reply to "Reality distortion field."
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

I don't think my customers care one iota whether Microsoft and Apple are evil companies that have used questionable, if not illegal business practices in the past.


Does it indicate illiteracy of customers in the history of technology and companies involved, or their neglect of making a proper moral choice?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Reality distortion field.
by helix on Thu 29th Dec 2011 02:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Reality distortion field."
helix Member since:
2011-08-04

Neither; the average consumer simply doesn't seem to care. Some of us who follow Microsoft and Apple related news might be appalled at their behavior, but most people are oblivious to such things. Now if they went out and killed baby seals, that might be different.

Reply Score: 1

You've converted at least one phone user
by mattymoo on Thu 29th Dec 2011 01:07 UTC
mattymoo
Member since:
2011-12-29

I'm a linux geek from way back, but I never jumped on board the smartphone train. I never really had the need for them, I still don't, even though I now on a WP7 phone.

Everytime I considered buying one, I always ended up putting off the purchase because my 5 year old nokia brick phone still worked fine, and these smartphones become outdated at a rate that makes PC components look like a good investment!

I tried friends and families iOS and Android phones, the interfaces of them never really 'grabbed' me as being what I ideally wanted in an personal computing device, but I resigned myself to eventually getting one as the contacts/task management/email integration on the nokia is horrible or non-existant.

I also had an old Windows CE PDA that I didn't really like, I ended up putting linux and QT on it, but that had limited functionality also, eventually stopped using it altogether.

When my old classic-style nokia finally packed it in a few weeks back, I went to the phone store to look at WP7 phones after all the positive comments I had read about them from Thom. After using it for a few moments, I was sold. The interface is so responsive, and I am really happy with the decision. It is a really nice phone to live with. The 'tiles' are easy to manipulate and all the text is large and clear. I installed zune and was quite impressed by it also, it is a lot nicer than iTunes on windows.

I've shown my wife my phone and I think her next phone will be WP7 too, she currently has an android.

I really think the forking, fragmentation and lack of updates for existing phones will become a bigger and bigger problem over time for the android platform. It isn't PC land where people can readily roll their own and use an existing supply of devices/drivers to get any OS up quickly on pretty much any hardware, if you stuff up your PC you just start over, if you brick your phone, well -- you've bricked your phone. How terminal that is depends on the particular bit of hardware you're dealing with, and a lot of endusers don't want to funk around at that level to begin with.

Apple & MS's support and update arrangements work well in this environment, and if a particular android phone maker takes it upon themselves to establish a reputation for having a smooth update cycle, and providing updates for a long time on their phones, it will be a selling point to consumers and distinguish themselves from the pack.

Reply Score: 1

WebOS
by ashes_786 on Thu 29th Dec 2011 01:59 UTC
ashes_786
Member since:
2011-10-22

I'd rather have an Open Source WebOS as the third platform than WP7 and the parasitic Microsoft Corporation gaining significant market share in smartphones. In truth MS don't care if WP7 fails or not they still have their cash cows (Windows and Office) and as long as the Android manufacturers pay their protection money to Redmond MS makes money from smartphones with or without WP7. I really hope an Open Source WebOS can offer an alternative to Android for users and manufacturers and disrupt Microsoft's parasitic strategy soon.

Reply Score: 2

Apps
by jebb on Thu 29th Dec 2011 18:31 UTC
jebb
Member since:
2006-07-06

Well, to provide a bit of completely anecdotal feedback, in my case it was the available software. I had to buy the missus a smartphone for Christmas, having never owned or extensively used one myself (apart from a company-provided Blackberry Curve for a couple of years).

Way up on my quickly-put together list of requirements was the ability to control my mpd-running Dreamplug at home. I looked around for a while, but could not find any traces of a WP7-based MPD client, either established or in development, which pretty much killed this option for me. Rather sadly in fact, as I quite liked the Lumia 800 design...

Edited 2011-12-29 18:39 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Guardian on Windows Phone:
by No it isnt on Fri 30th Dec 2011 12:15 UTC
No it isnt
Member since:
2005-11-14