Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 18th Dec 2013 17:24 UTC
Windows

2013 was nothing less than a blockbuster success for Windows Phone, which went from industry also-ran to the undisputed third mobile ecosystem, and is poised to challenge iPhone for the number two spot. You didn't think it could get this good? That's OK, neither did I.

Windows Phone seemingly turns a corner with every new application, small operating system update, and new Nokia Lumia. It's turning so many corners it's running in circles.

Thread beginning with comment 578952
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 18th Dec 2013 17:33 UTC
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

Thurrot is pretty much spot on here and it mirrors my thoughts exactly on Windows Phone. Microsoft has enough money, patience, and stubbornness to brute force itself mobile success.

It will pay developers, pay carriers, pay OEMs, sink massive amounts of money into marketing, and basically spare no expense to ensure the survival of Windows Phone.

The market share gains in the various regions prove exactly what I've been saying all along, and hilariously flies in the face of the naysayers on this website.

But I'm sure through some contrived logic some here will simultaneously be downbeat on Windows Phone while remaining strangely bullish about the prospects for Sailfish, Tizen, and FFOS. It used to be BB10 and Bada but those fell by the wayside (don't tell Tomi Ahonen who alot of you worship, who insisted BB10 would beat Windows Phone LOL).

Reply Score: 0

RE: Comment by Nelson
by Carewolf on Wed 18th Dec 2013 17:51 in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
Carewolf Member since:
2005-09-08

Well, they continue to grow and is showing there is room for more than 2 brands, though this year most of the growth was in the new market of very cheap low-end smartphones where there is little competition and less profit. So on high-end high profit smartphones the situation is probably not nearly as good.

We know Nokia made a profit this year, the question is how close the mobile division in itself is to breaking even, that is what will determine if this is still a money sink or a stable position in the market.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Comment by Nelson
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Wed 18th Dec 2013 18:16 in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Globally this is the growth.

Windows Phone ended 2012 with worldwide market share of 2.8 percent


By the end of this year, things are looking better, and much better in many countries. Worldwide, Windows Phone commanded 3.6 percent worldwide market share


While the individual company market shares are growing, globally its still not very growing much. The real story of the numbers is more about BB10 dying, IOS growth stagnating, and Android KILLING EVERY ONE.

I'll believe Windows phone is a real contender when someone I know (regardless of country they live in) has one.

EDIT: Or the division turns a profit. Although that's less of a concern now that its a part of Microsoft, I imagine they want a profit out of it. Rather than just driving traffic to their web services to show them ads, like Google.

Edited 2013-12-18 18:21 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 10

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 18th Dec 2013 18:19 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Yup. Success isn't simultaneous across all markets all at once, but looking at a region by region breakdown am interesting picture starts to form.

Global market share is a lagging indicator I'd say, and I expect them to make inroads there after making significant headway in these markets.

I think its fair to say though, based on the regional data that Windows Phone is doing increasingly well.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by lucas_maximus on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:05 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

In Europe they are doing quite well in the low end.

As much as this matters generally from feedback I had from people that I know that have one are:

* Quite happy with the phone and are pleasantly surprised. (I even heard this from a guy that used to write commericial embedded Operating Systems and is a SQL GOD).
* The girls that have them like the colours.

Disclaimer: I own a Galaxy S3 Mini.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by moondevil on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:59 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

I'll believe Windows phone is a real contender when someone I know (regardless of country they live in) has one.


Then come to Germany, you will see quite a few around.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by jgfenix on Thu 19th Dec 2013 07:52 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
jgfenix Member since:
2006-05-25

I would say that it has more to do with the demise of Symbian inside Nokia.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by zima on Sun 22nd Dec 2013 00:15 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

I'll believe Windows phone is a real contender when someone I know (regardless of country they live in) has one.

Is that the metric? Because I know several, does that make it a raving success?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by Nelson
by some1 on Wed 18th Dec 2013 18:43 in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
some1 Member since:
2010-10-05

The market share gains in the various regions prove exactly what I've been saying all along, and hilariously flies in the face of the naysayers on this website.

Oh, this reminds me of another prediction that you've made:
http://www.osnews.com/permalink?539399
So, do you want fries with your hat?

Reply Parent Score: 12

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 18th Dec 2013 18:54 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Good one.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 18th Dec 2013 18:57 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Nope. You got me. That was a bad call, ouch.

That's the fun in this though, you look at the information available, make a prediction and sometimes it pans out and sometimes it doesn't.

Though I will point out that the Surface went on to outsell the Nexus 10 (mums the word on that here though...).

Edited 2013-12-18 19:00 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Comment by Nelson
by shmerl on Wed 18th Dec 2013 18:45 in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

Pouring money into a dead horse won't make it run faster. Zombie horse is an option though.

Edited 2013-12-18 18:46 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by lucas_maximus on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:13 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

It isn't dead, it just hasn't reached it peak.

Disclaimer: I sometimes provide pool betting solutions for horse racing ;-)

Edited 2013-12-18 19:13 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Comment by Nelson
by Tony Swash on Wed 18th Dec 2013 19:26 in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

It will pay developers, pay carriers, pay OEMs, sink massive amounts of money into marketing, and basically spare no expense to ensure the survival of Windows Phone.


Why?

Seriously why should Microsoft pursue that as a business strategy?

To build something that loses more money than Bing?

I just can't see the point?

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 18th Dec 2013 20:23 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

When the Surface was announced it was billed as "the stage" for Microsoft services. iDevices are a stage, Android devices are a stage, etc. What MSFT probably believes is that they can put on the best show so to speak.

Bing is deeply integrated into Windows 8.1 and Xbox for example. That level of seamlessness is hard to achieve unless you control the entire stack.

Speaking on Bing, yes it loses money but yes it also incubated Azure which makes a lot of money. Its funny how these things work.

Devices are Microsoft's weak point, or should I say was, since the Nokia acquisition brings major hardware competence that will extend beyond phones into tablets, xbox,and wearables.

Microsoft always did software well, and services are just an implementation detail of that. Now they do hardware well. And they have a ton of money.

Devices and Services allows them to control their own destiny. Look at how Apple is shutting Google out of its walled garden for example.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by segedunum on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:21 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Why?

Seriously why should Microsoft pursue that as a business strategy?

Because they believe it works. They had experience with waiting a long time for Windows to amount to something, but there wasn't two entrenched operating system ahead of them with a large amount of apps written for them. Ditto for Bing. They have a blind belief that it will all come good and they won't change.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by Nelson
by theTSF on Wed 18th Dec 2013 20:06 in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
theTSF Member since:
2005-09-27

Microsoft does have the power to push and withstand for a while. However it doesn't guarantee success.

The Zune never replaced the iPod, even after a strong attempt.

I think widows mobile growth, is just due to Nokia having a decent camera that works as a phone that runs Windows Mobile. If Nokia used Android they will probably sell just as many if not more units. And MS will be much further behind.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE: Comment by Nelson
by segedunum on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:04 in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Thurrott is a cheerleader, as you are, who believes there is some magical pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.

You're not going to see anyone writing articles like this who isn't cheerleading for Microsoft.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Thu 19th Dec 2013 19:38 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Uh, the reports cited are from KWP and are not sourced by Paul Thurrot (as opposed to Tomi who sources numbers from himself, yet who few here ever question).

Just FYI, Thom also reported on these very same numbers. But no, no Paul Thurrot, cheerleader, right right.

*rolls eyes*

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Comment by Nelson
by segedunum on Thu 19th Dec 2013 21:11 in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Thurrot is pretty much spot on here and it mirrors my thoughts exactly on Windows Phone. Microsoft has enough money, patience, and stubbornness to brute force itself mobile success.

It will pay developers, pay carriers, pay OEMs, sink massive amounts of money into marketing, and basically spare no expense to ensure the survival of Windows Phone.

So you're admitting Windows Phone is a sinkhole for large amounts of cash. Well, they've been doing that for years on end and it's not worked.

The market share gains in the various regions prove exactly what I've been saying all along, and hilariously flies in the face of the naysayers on this website.

Throwing cheap or free phones at marginal ('regional' - ROTFL) markets is always going to give you nice nice shot in the arm. We've seen it all before. It won't last.

That's all these 'figures' tell us. Nothing has changed.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Fri 20th Dec 2013 11:24 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I think you're confused. In fact, I don't think, I know you're confused.

Which is sad because I came into this thinking you were intelligent. Perhaps misguided and a smart ass, but intelligent.

There is proof in the KWP, IDC, Canalys, Gartner, and Windows Phone store transaction increases that Windows Phone is gaining traction.

The region by region break downs serve to illustrate that WP is growing. Nothing more, nothing less. I think your outrage comes because you think its being used to imply WP is gaining worldwide traction. Its not, at least not yet.

So for all of the accusations that I'm spinning these numbers into something they're not, it is actually you who wants to read more into this than what is there, probably because it helps your argument.

Reply Parent Score: 3