Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 27th Feb 2012 11:19 UTC
Windows There's a lot of news coming out of Mobile World Congress in Barcelona today, but since we can't compete with the well-funded gadget blogs, I suggest you read up on the details at The Verge (or Engadget). One thing stood out to me, though. While the entire industry is moving towards more cores, more megapixels, more gigahertz, more display inches - Microsoft is doing the exact opposite. Windows Phone has been updated and optimised to run on slower hardware.
Thread beginning with comment 508679
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by kaiwai
by B. Janssen on Mon 27th Feb 2012 15:26 UTC in reply to "Comment by kaiwai"
B. Janssen
Member since:
2006-10-11

Ok, I can understand going for the low end - that makes sense but what doesn't make sense is how utterly crappy their so-called 'high end' phones are. I mean, come on, the maximum amount of storage one can get with a Windows Phone 7.5 device is 16GB? I'm sitting here with an iPhone 4 with 32GB and find even that is too constrictive given that I have over 160GB worth of music. In all due respects when are we going to see Windows Phone vendors pull finger and provide devices with more than 16GB of storage? They seem to be so focused on the low end that they ignore the fact that their so-called 'high end' is crap when it comes to the specifications that matter, namely, greater than 16GB standard storage size and whether one can expand storage using microsd cards!


My guess would be that Nokia pressured them into lowering the specs. Iphones won't be the next billion, don't you think? (OK, Symbian Belle is actually a good platform, but it can't compete in the power user department. Two-way syncing is still only working for ONE email address and calendar... what are they thinking?)

Furthermore, the specs of the "high end" WP7 devices may seem low in comparison to top-of-the-line Androids and Iphones, but WP7 is performing amazingly on this "limited" hardware. Also, people obviously don't care about micro-SD cards, replaceable batteries, otherwise the Iphone wouldn't sell so well to the unwashed masses (i.e. non-tech consumers).

Now, for us as educated techies two questions remain: 1) considering the used hardware, why are WP7 phones as expensive as better specified Androids or Iphones? and 2) Zune? Really? A smartphone that's not 100% OTA is just not that smart.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai
by kaiwai on Mon 27th Feb 2012 15:35 in reply to "RE: Comment by kaiwai"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

My guess would be that Nokia pressured them into lowering the specs. Iphones won't be the next billion, don't you think? (OK, Symbian Belle is actually a good platform, but it can't compete in the power user department. Two-way syncing is still only working for ONE email address and calendar... what are they thinking?)

Furthermore, the specs of the "high end" WP7 devices may seem low in comparison to top-of-the-line Androids and Iphones, but WP7 is performing amazingly on this "limited" hardware. Also, people obviously don't care about micro-SD cards, replaceable batteries, otherwise the Iphone wouldn't sell so well to the unwashed masses (i.e. non-tech consumers).

Now, for us as educated techies two questions remain: 1) considering the used hardware, why are WP7 phones as expensive as better specified Androids or Iphones? and 2) Zune? Really? A smartphone that's not 100% OTA is just not that smart.


Ok, I can do without the replaceable battery or the microsd card but how about some more storage! I mean, come on, launch a Lumia 800 with 64GB already! Why isn't there a Windows Phone 7 device with 64GB of storage or at the very least 32GB of storage?!

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by kaiwai
by B. Janssen on Mon 27th Feb 2012 17:51 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai"
B. Janssen Member since:
2006-10-11

Ok, I can do without the replaceable battery or the microsd card but how about some more storage! I mean, come on, launch a Lumia 800 with 64GB already! Why isn't there a Windows Phone 7 device with 64GB of storage or at the very least 32GB of storage?!


Maybe MS thinks that the 25GB Skydrive is enough? I'm not convinced, but Apple (Idrive) or HTC (Dropbox) seem to think along these lines, too.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai
by CapEnt on Mon 27th Feb 2012 17:14 in reply to "RE: Comment by kaiwai"
CapEnt Member since:
2005-12-18

Now, for us as educated techies two questions remain: 1) considering the used hardware, why are WP7 phones as expensive as better specified Androids or Iphones? and 2) Zune? Really? A smartphone that's not 100% OTA is just not that smart.


1) I think thats because economics of scale: since iPhone and famous branded Androids sells by tens of millions every month, Apple and Motorola/Sony/Samsung/LG/HTC can get better deals from suppliers. You can argue that some of these manufacturers also assembly WP7 phones, but i bet that they allocate the premium parts and R&D money for their best seller products. So even if MS gives for free WP7 licenses, the hardware will offset the price.

2) I'm impressed that Zune still exist.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by kaiwai
by B. Janssen on Mon 27th Feb 2012 17:54 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai"
B. Janssen Member since:
2006-10-11

1) I think thats because economics of scale: since iPhone and famous branded Androids sells by tens of millions every month, Apple and Motorola/Sony/Samsung/LG/HTC can get better deals from suppliers. You can argue that some of these manufacturers also assembly WP7 phones, but i bet that they allocate the premium parts and R&D money for their best seller products. So even if MS gives for free WP7 licenses, the hardware will offset the price.


I would buy that argument for Apple and Samsung, maybe even Motorola, but I really don't think that LG or HTC can shop cheaper than Nokia.


2) I'm impressed that Zune still exist.

And I'm horrified. On the other hand, people put up with Itunes. So, why not? ;)

Edit: Fixed stupid quotes.

Edited 2012-02-27 17:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by kaiwai
by kaiwai on Tue 28th Feb 2012 01:43 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

1) I think thats because economics of scale: since iPhone and famous branded Androids sells by tens of millions every month, Apple and Motorola/Sony/Samsung/LG/HTC can get better deals from suppliers. You can argue that some of these manufacturers also assembly WP7 phones, but i bet that they allocate the premium parts and R&D money for their best seller products. So even if MS gives for free WP7 licenses, the hardware will offset the price.

2) I'm impressed that Zune still exist.


One could also argue that Microsoft restricting the choice of SOC's one can use also limits the vendor because what it would allow for example is the same hardware from Android to be re-used for a Windows Phone 7 device with the only difference being the operating system and case it is sold in rather than having to have multiple SOC's across the product lines which drive up costs for the handset vendor. As noted in an interview not too long ago, there is a move apparently to expand the number of SOC's supported via the move to a Windows NT core which is apparently more flexible when it comes to the ability to add new SOC support than it is with the current Windows CE 6.0R3/7.0 hybrid.

Reply Parent Score: 2