Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 11th Dec 2012 23:09 UTC
Windows So, last night, Windows Phone 8 got its first update - specifically for the HTC 8X. In this day and age, where iOS is the gold standard and shows the industry how it ought to be done, and Android is the exact opposite, Windows Phone 7 was a bit of an in-between - every phone got every update, but the staggered rollout was slow and frustrating, often due to carrier meddling. How will Windows Phone 8 fare?
Thread beginning with comment 544883
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[8]: Nexus Line
by tylerdurden on Wed 12th Dec 2012 22:45 UTC in reply to "RE[7]: Nexus Line"
tylerdurden
Member since:
2009-03-17


Windows Phone total install base was in the millions, I believe over ten million last I checked. However, I don't see how their update mechanisms have been proven not to scale, to the extent that you use it as an excuse to shrug off the fact that most Windows Phone users are on the latest version of the platform.


I don't know, 3 different completely incompatible iterations in less than 3 years with a user base that shrunk by a factor of 5 during the process, seem like a clear failure to scale, to me at least. I am aware Microsoft's marketing department may not share that opinion, however.

For what it is worth,I was actually conceding the possibility that what you claimed was true: that the majority of Windows Phone users are at the latest major version (8). I was simply pointing out that the majority of those users are new to that platform, so them being on the latest revision of the software is their default state, thus they have little to do with Microsoft's supposed competence for upgrading the end user's platform transparently.



Windows Mobile is not Windows Phone. That's akin to saying that Samsung didn't provide an update path from their Omnia Windows Mobile lineup to their Galaxy S III. They are clearly different platforms.


You'd have a point if that was not a completely false equivalence. You're trying to compare going from two different OS vendors (Microsoft vs Google) as it being the same as upgrading among the same vendor phone OS.

The point being that when it comes to upgrade paths for a phone OS, Microsoft lives in a glass house. So you should be more careful when hurling them rocks around...

Edited 2012-12-12 22:48 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[9]: Nexus Line
by Nelson on Wed 12th Dec 2012 22:54 in reply to "RE[8]: Nexus Line"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I don't know, 3 different completely incompatible iterations in less than 3 years with a user base that shrunk by a factor of 5 during the process, seem like a clear failure to scale, to me at least. I am aware Microsoft's marketing department may not share that opinion, however.


Not what I meant, but I get it, you got your snide remark in. Let's move on.

For what it is worth,I was actually conceding the possibility that what you claimed was true: that the majority of Windows Phone users are at the latest major version (8).


The majority of Windows Phone users are on the latest major version for their devices. Windows Phone 7 devices do not have an upgrade path to 8.0, but rather go on to 7.8 .

It's like when Android launched 3.0 Honeycomb but didn't provide a path to 3.0 from Phones. That didn't mean that 2.3 was outdated at the time. Those phones were on their latest revisions.


I was simply pointing out that the majority of those users are new to that platform, so them being on the latest revision of the software is their default state, thus they have little to do with Microsoft's supposed competence for upgrading the end user's platform transparently.


However, two years after Windows Phone 7 launched, most users are on version 7.1.8773, which is the latest Windows Phone 7 release.


You'd have a point if that was not a completely false equivalence. You're trying to compare going from two different OS vendors (Microsoft vs Google) as it being the same as upgrading among the same vendor phone OS.


The OSes are fundamentally different, with different user spaces, settings, and application execution models. The perspectives and approaches are different between the two, so it is not possible for old WM 6.5 handsets to be updated to Windows Phone 7.

You conveniently ignore the hardware argument I brought up which mentioned that innovation in Windows Mobile handsets stagnated for years, and most of them were still using resistive screens and slow processors in 2010. The only one up to snuff, somewhat was the HD2.


The point being that when it comes to upgrade paths for a phone OS, Microsoft lives in a glass house. So you should be more careful when hurling them rocks around...


When it comes to upgrade paths for Windows Phone, I think Microsoft is pretty solid.

They have all WP7 users on the current version of WP7, and have an upgrade path for them which extends into next year and beyond.

It is simple to speak about such things like you do, without having actual hands on experience with devices, or being well versed enough on the platform to understand these differences, but it doesn't make them non-existent.

The bottom line is: Equating the Windows Phone situation to Android devices that often receive NO updates from Google after launch is NOT a fair comparison.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[10]: Nexus Line
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 12th Dec 2012 23:44 in reply to "RE[9]: Nexus Line"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

The majority of Windows Phone users are on the latest major version for their devices. Windows Phone 7 devices do not have an upgrade path to 8.0, but rather go on to 7.8 .


What? By extension, every Android device is on its latest version too. The Samsung Galaxy Ace Focus Epic 4G MyTouch BBQ 's latest version is Android 2.3 - not 4.2. There is no 4.2 for said device, just as much as there is no WP8 for the HD7.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[10]: Nexus Line
by tylerdurden on Thu 13th Dec 2012 01:00 in reply to "RE[9]: Nexus Line"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

[a bunch of red herring cut off in order to save time and space]

The bottom line is: Equating the Windows Phone situation to Android devices that often receive NO updates from Google after launch is NOT a fair comparison.


And yet that is exactly what you keep on doing.

So basically, if I understand the gist of your argument, a comparison is only "fair" so long it makes the Microsoft product look good. Got it.

Google's upgrade policies may suck for some devices, but implying that Microsoft has a better track record is silly. Specially since the crux for your argument was something that had nothing to do with being the result of software upgrades: brand new users to that platform. Which is what I was pointing out, and since it destroyed your argument you keep trying to dismiss as "snark."

Edited 2012-12-13 01:01 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3