Home > Wireless > Windows Phone 7 Reviews: Beauty or the Beast? Windows Phone 7 Reviews: Beauty or the Beast? Submitted by shaneco 2010-07-21 Wireless 13 Comments Early takes on the Technical Preview of Windows Phone 7 are more thumbs up than screw up. But is it too late to sway users? About The Author David Adams Follow me on Twitter @david_adams 13 Comments 2010-07-22 4:22 am ramasubbu_sk May be people will not rush at any store & buy the phone. But we have to wait and see the reality. If me, Windows Phone 7 is not bad phone but it is didn’t WoW! Me Apple have taken the 100% Wow from me. But they are slightly different this time. 2010-07-23 5:12 pm Bill Shooter of Bul Did not mean to mod this comment up. It was a slip of the mouse. Not that I have anything against it. Hopefully, responding to it will remove the positive mod. 2010-07-22 7:15 am Thom Holwerda I’m intrigued by Windows Phone 7. Contrary to iOS and Android, this is a truly new approach to mobile computing, doing away with the concept of individual isolated applications as much as possible – contrary to iOS and Android which are, for all intents and purposes, desktop operating systems with an adapted interface (for small screens). On top of that, it looks absolutely beautiful. I love the sharpness of it all. Who would’ve thought Microsoft the one to come up with a truly new approach. The tables, they turn. You’ll also note that the usual Microsoft-bashing suspects, like Gruber, have not reported about the positive previews on Giz and Engadget at all – while before, they would jump on every bit of negative Windows Mobile news. Edited 2010-07-22 07:17 UTC 2010-07-22 7:52 am pica First of all: Welcome back, Thom! Yes, bashing seems to be modern these days. Bashing is IMHO no good style. But bashing also is precious. Bashing tells about cultures. In the last month it got obvious for me, there is a huge culture gap between Apple iP[hone|ad] and Android “fan boyz”. I guess, these are mainly “boyz” not “girlzzz”. Maybe, I’ll take some time in the next few weeks and write a small essay on my view on that topic. pica Edited 2010-07-22 07:53 UTC 2010-07-22 7:33 am pica somehow that article seems to mix up these two systems. Even if — I do not know if — the kernel is (almost) the same, Windows Phone 7 is NOT Windows 7. Would anybody say Android and RHEL or SuSE Enterprise Linux is the same. Yes, both share almost the same kernel. pica 2010-07-22 2:03 pm DonnyEMU You don’t run the same apps on desktop linux as you do on the phone (even android) there is a screen real-estate question.. The same goes for Windows Phone 7… However both platforms each use the same development tools and frameworks, respectively of course.. In fact Windows Phone 7 is based on the portable .NET framework we all know as Silverlight. So any Silverlight app (including out of browser ones) can easily be ported. Silverlight and Windows 7 (WPF) apps have a lot in common thanks to screen layouts in XAML.. So this Windows Phone 7 is not Windows 7 desktop OS is true, it doesn’t really need to be.. The lightweight kernel of the .NET compact framework sits below it giving it a one two punch, and the same web apps in silverlight can easily run in Windows 7 desktop or Windows Phone 7.. Just as XNA games on Windows Desktop and X-Box 360 can easily (with screen considerations) run great on Windows Phone 7.. So get over these comments as porting is even easier and tools like Expression Blend 4 for Windows Phone 7 are much better tools than Interface Builder on the Mac (for iPhone) or what comes standard in the Android SDK (including googlelabs app inventor) and EASIER and have true design imports (like photoshop and illustrator).. Also, C# is much easier to code in and takes a lot less code to do the same thing in Objective C or C++ so it takes less time and costs less to port an app. Plus Microsoft’s cloud solutions and support for enterprise intfrastructure to support them are already in place at most firms, versus iPhone or Android.. So get over trying to pan a product that isn’t even released yet.. Microsoft doesn’t have to wow people they never have been the leader with that anyway.. They have to support enterprise, come out with a more cost-effective solution that is easier to develop for and has better looking and working apps.. In my opinion they’ve done all of that, and you are probably really haven’t taken a good look at what they are going to be offering if you think otherwise.. 2010-07-22 8:40 pm vivainio The lightweight kernel of the .NET compact framework sits below it giving it a one two punch, and the same web apps in silverlight can easily run in Windows 7 desktop or Windows Phone 7.. One two punch? Are you reading this from some marketing brochure? 😉 Also, C# is much easier to code in and takes a lot less code to do the same thing in Objective C or C++ so it takes less time and costs less to port an app. Ease of coding comes from the libraries, languages are mostly equivalent, with C# having a slight edge (with closures etc). The killer with C# & silverlight is that the code you write is proprietary microsoft-only code – if your product doesn’t “make it”, you have intellectual property of zero value at your hands. You could argue the same for ObjC, but iPhone is already popular so the risk is lower. What’s interesting with windows phone 7 is the ui design. You’d never had expected Microsoft to aim at such simple & clean look. 2010-07-23 8:04 am Panajev Well, with iOS4, Objective-C supports blocks (and GCD) on the iPhone too so that’s a wash in terms of closures. Also, Objective-C has improved considerably over the past few years (having moved, for 64 bit OS X apps and all iOS 4.x apps, to a single unified runtime for simulators and devices). http://www.mcubedsw.com/blog/index.php/site/comments/new_objective-… Objective-C 2.2, even without GC on the iPhone and the iPad, is quite cool . 2010-07-24 5:28 am nt_jerkface The killer with C# & silverlight is that the code you write is proprietary microsoft-only code – if your product doesn’t “make it”, you have intellectual property of zero value at your hands. There’s an investment risk with any platform. Anyways if you use XNA you can also target Windows and the 360. There is also MonoTouch and MonoDroid is in the works. Android’s Java is actually incompatible with standard Java so I’m really not seeing a disadvantage for mobile .net developers. http://apsblog.burtongroup.com/google_android/ 2010-07-23 10:46 am JAlexoid They have to support enterprise, come out with a more cost-effective solution that is easier to develop for and has better looking and working apps.. In my opinion they’ve done all of that, and you are probably really haven’t taken a good look at what they are going to be offering if you think otherwise.. Yeah, but they aren’t targeting the enterprise market with WinPho7, for the enterprise WinMo is still there. WinPho7 is there to take on iPhone(the consumer market). 2010-07-22 3:07 pm arpan I was really excited to see another interesting mobile OS. Hoping it would give some compitition to iOS & Android. And then I find out that it’s coming out with IE7!!! Atleast mobile websites didn’t have to worry about dealing with ancient browsers, and now this comes out. I really hope that Windows Phone 7 is a failure until they update their os with a decent browser. 2010-07-24 4:13 pm Lennie In the previous iterations IE is actually a fork of IE4 which they add features to, so it has no relations to normal IE. So IE7 is probably just some ‘feature equivalant’ to IE7, whatever that means. 2010-07-25 6:23 pm arpan I don’t think so. From what I’ve heard, the browser in Windows Phone 7 is a version based on IE7 with a few enhancements from IE8. So, I’m pretty sure it’s based on the desktop IE7 (with modifications of course), and isn’t related to the one from Windows Mobile. At least that’s what I’m hoping.