Related
Hi there, this post is basically dedicated to current users of windows mobile, who bought their phone because of the virtues an open plattform offers. People like us aren't happy with the direction ms is heading with windows phone 7 and hope that the realize their wrong doing by reimplanting things like multitasking, deep-customization, file-system access, native coding or simply copy, cut and paste.
But why should we buy a windows phone 7 device and hope they transform it to something that resembles wm6 offer time when we could just switch to another plattform?
I mean...
- booth the devices we own and the software we use are not compatible to wp7.
- Android basically got every of the above features wp7 is lagging.
- Android devices are aviable or will be released from every major windows mobile manufacture.
- A lot of software studios will produce for Android.
- Through the ndk Google offers there will probably be more windows mobile software on Android than on windows phone in a year from now.
The only thing wp7 got IMO is the ui, and as we all know from endless debates with the iphone-guys ui is a matter of taste and can be ported...
If you're not a Google or Java hater and Android does what you need... don't hesitate.
Android is good. I'm right now playing with an older Android phone, and although it is very slow (old QCOM processor) and has a small screen, I find the experience to be better than the experience I have with my HD2.
I don't have the slightest doubt anymore that Android is better than iPhone OS or WP7S.
It's smooth.
It has a great, flexible home screen (who needs tiles when you got widgets?).
It has by far the best solution for notifications.
It multitasks.
It has a Marketplace and allows you to side-load apps.
It allows you to access the file system.
It copies and pastes.
It has an NDK.
It is available right now and only getting better.
What you don't get is integration with Microsoft's services, like Windows Live and XBox Live. Of course, there's a good chance that you don't care about them.
I've never used an iPhone but I've dabbled in Android for a while. Mostly, through the Poly port for Kaiser. Here's my views on WM6.5 vs Android.
Windows Mobile GOOD
#1 WM5 sucked. Very unstable, and scrolling speed is very slow. WM6 wasn't much different. WM6.1 become stable, but speed still suffers. WM6.5 very stable, but speed suffers. WM6.5.3 is very stable, and the speed is very fast, including scrolling.
#2 True freedom. You have 3 ways to install applications, and the choice for it to be on the SD card or internal memory. Copy and Paste, and all that jazz.
#3 Customization! Like Mc Donald's says, have it your way.
#4 Huge selection of apps.
Windows Mobile BAD
#1 Lots of problems with 3D acceleration support. Mainly due to OpenGL ES drivers.
#2 Only way to upgrade OS is through custom built roms on XDA-Developers. No support from MS, HTC, and etc.
#3 Majority of applications were written in 2003, and have since been abandoned.
#4 With Phone7 coming soon, developers will completely abandon WM6.5, and move onto Phone 7.
Android GOOD
#1 Based on Linux, which means lots of community support.
#2 Already has an established amount of useful applications.
#3 Very customizable. I've seen some impressive 3D stuff.
#4 You can install applications from the SD card.
#5 Copy and paste exists.
Android BAD
#1 Applications must be installed into main memory, unless you partition your SD card.
#2 Very reliant on a internet connection to do a lot of things.
#3 No Offline GPS option for the Nav.
#4 Google might try to take away the "Google" experience from rom cookers.
#3 No Offline GPS option for the Nav.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's IGO8, Copilot... and some others. Or did I get you wrong?
#1 Applications must be installed into main memory, unless you partition your SD card.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not anymore, afaik.
#4 Huge selection of apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's even more true for Android.
But this is not WM6.5 vs. Android. WM6.5 is doomed, so the time will come when you have to switch.
WP7S is not worth waiting for, it's just an iPhone OS clone. So, in my opinion, there's no reason not to switch now, if you want to.
What happens when Android becomes the NEW Windows Mobile? You know it's headed in that direction now. There's like 3 or 4 different versions of the OS and the app community isn't doing well. When WP7 gets its footing in the market (iPhone already has), it's going to be really difficult to compete with these. Perhaps Android will be relegated to low-end smartphones
C:Sharp! said:
There's IGO8, Copilot... and some others. Or did I get you wrong?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I mean the built in Nav software, which the new one is pretty cool. I could use Ndrive, but I really like the built in Nav.
Not anymore, afaik.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe it's because I'm using a port for the HTC Kaiser. If that's the case, that can be scratched off the list.
WhyBe said:
What happens when Android becomes the NEW Windows Mobile? You know it's headed in that direction now. There's like 3 or 4 different versions of the OS and the app community isn't doing well. When WP7 gets its footing in the market (iPhone already has), it's going to be really difficult to compete with these. Perhaps Android will be relegated to low-end smartphones
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Won't happen for various reasons. Windows Mobile was never really taken seriously by Microsoft until now, but Android has Google behind them.
It's a lot like what happened to Internet Explorer. When Microsoft won the browser war between Netscape, they left it completely alone. Suddenly FireFox, Chrome, Safari, and Opera are kicking it's ass. Same thing happened with Windows Mobile. iPhone, and Android appeared and took Microsoft by surprise.
Also, since it's linux based, it can never truly die. The community has it's hands on it now, and they'll never let go. Don't be surprised if we see Linux distros in the Future for many phones. Something like Ubuntu or Slackware could become common to see on cooked phone roms, in a couple of years.
iPhone and Windows Phone 7 will still be popular, but does anyone truly believe that phones with so many restrictions will last? I'm sure Microsoft is betting that the Xbox feature will grab people, much like Apple is betting on that their fan base will always grab customers.
Won't happen for various reasons. Windows Mobile was never really taken seriously by Microsoft until now, but Android has Google behind them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google has one success, that is it's search engine. This does not automatically mean success with other endeavors.
It's a lot like what happened to Internet Explorer. When Microsoft won the browser war between Netscape, they left it completely alone. Suddenly FireFox, Chrome, Safari, and Opera are kicking it's ass.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nothing is kicking IE's ass. What world are you living in?
Same thing happened with Windows Mobile. iPhone, and Android appeared and took Microsoft by surprise.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
MS deserved it.
Also, since it's linux based, it can never truly die. The community has it's hands on it now, and they'll never let go. Don't be surprised if we see Linux distros in the Future for many phones. Something like Ubuntu or Slackware could become common to see on cooked phone roms, in a couple of years.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It may not die, per se, but it definitely will never be big. Niche product at best. There's too much confusion in open systems. How many incompatible Android OS'es are out now? Modern smartphones will win or lose based on their apps. Androids app situation sucks right now.
iPhone and Windows Phone 7 will still be popular, but does anyone truly believe that phones with so many restrictions will last? I'm sure Microsoft is betting that the Xbox feature will grab people, much like Apple is betting on that their fan base will always grab customers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is smart business. Use your existing successes to build a customer base. All smart companies do this...even Google.
WhyBe said:
Google has one success, that is it's search engine. This does not automatically mean success with other endeavors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Gmail
Google Map
Chrome Web Broswer
Google voice
YouTube
All this is offered for free.
Nothing is kicking IE's ass. What world are you living in?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This world.
If you added IE6+IE7+IE8, then you can say it's more popular then FireFox. You have to wonder, if people are still using IE6 then it's most likely they probably don't know about other web browsers, or don't even know what one is. You know the type, logs on twitter, facebook, and myspace and uses AIM to chat to people.
It may not die, per se, but it definitely will never be big. Niche product at best. There's too much confusion in open systems. How many incompatible Android OS'es are out now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No more then Windows Mobile will have. We'll soon have legacy Windows Mobile 6.5, and Phone 7. Neither are compatible.
Modern smartphones will win or lose based on their apps. Androids app situation sucks right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure about Windows Phone 7, but iPhone has it horrible right now.
No porn apps
No emulators
No web browsers
No flash support
Android may not have as many pull my finger apps or farting apps as iPhone, but at least we can have all of the above. iPhone and Phone7 owners will be able to have 100 different choices of how to make fart noises from their phone, while I'll be able to view flash websites. While iPhone and Phone7 will enjoy half ass made games for their phones, eventually Android will get a Playstation and N64 emulator. I consider any Genesis or SNES game to be far superior then any 3D accelerated game they can put on those phones as is.
The biggest blunder from Apple was them pulling the porn apps. Everyone knows the internet and DVDs became popular due to porn. Enforcing that rule is sure suicide, despite the horrible image of me walking into a public bathroom and finding someone wacking off to porn on their Android phone.
When Mozilla ports FireFox to Android, I'll be able to use ABP and NoScript to have a truly secure surfing experience. While IE on Phone7 fails horribly on the Acid3 test. As it is IE9 gets a 55/100 on Acid3.
Just from what I've mentioned I say there's plenty of incentive to go with an open OS. Jail break your iPhone or **** break your Phone7, but you'll be in this endless battle between Microsoft or Apple.
Dukenukemx said:
Gmail
Google Map
Chrome Web Broswer
Google voice
YouTube
All this is offered for free.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chrome Web Browser? A success? You must be kidding me. No, I'm not saying it's a bad product. But can you imagine how much money a promo campaign like Google did for Chrome, would cost a third party? So you spend billions of dollars (even though "virtual" in this case) and get absolutely laughable market share. Success?
YouTube they bought for a ridiculous amount of money, and it's a cash disposer. Yeah, we all enjoy it, no doubt about it. The more we enjoy it the more money Google coughs out on it. Windows Mobile is a bigger success than this.
Google Maps? You forgot Gmail. Some 90%+ of Google's income comes from its home page. Not even Adsense, which ads a few percentage points. So no, Google hasn't had a single success in any area apart from search, even though they've been trying to diversify like crazy because they are really scared of what may happen if they lose their search engine domination. The problem is, by doing all this free stuff everywhere about the only thing they achieve is that they technically cannot "fail". Sure, you don't set revenue targets, you just burn cash, what's a failure?
I love WM 6.5.3 and right now my phone (TD2) is just perfect the way it is. And if someday I want something to change then I can just flash a new ROM, install a cab or write another tool on my own.
I hate Android because your applications are running in a Java VM and you can't access the OS kernel functions like you can with WM.
Though yesterday I just for fun run Android on a Touch Diamond. I have to admit the UI is really nice done, even though it isn't THAT MUCH different compared to the user experience you get with 6.5.3. Some window animations here and there and I love it like you can pull down the taskbar and I like the multiple homescreen thing. Though I couldn't do a lot of things with it because for most things it needed a data connection (I didn't plug in a SIM card) and USB/WiFi didn't work. Also it asked me to sign up for Google account all the time. On 6.5.3 on the other hand some things are quite better implemented, for example start menu or Sense. I also like it that you can reach all functions through your touch screen. On Android you're always forced to use the hard keys to close a window or get out of an app. After all I wonder if it's possible to hack into the taskbar or bottom bar like I do on WM but due to Java VM environment I doubt you can do that.
After all, right now there's no reason why I should switch to Android. However I don't know what the situation will be in the next 1-2 years. So in the end all I can say: On the longer run it might be the only OS able to replace 6.5.3 in the future but right now it's just too limited for my taste (in other words I can also say it doesn't give me enough features to forget about some limits). But I definitely keep an eye on it
vangrieg said:
Chrome Web Browser? A success? You must be kidding me. No, I'm not saying it's a bad product. But can you imagine how much money a promo campaign like Google did for Chrome, would cost a third party? So you spend billions of dollars (even though "virtual" in this case) and get absolutely laughable market share. Success?
YouTube they bought for a ridiculous amount of money, and it's a cash disposer. Yeah, we all enjoy it, no doubt about it. The more we enjoy it the more money Google coughs out on it. Windows Mobile is a bigger success than this.
Google Maps? You forgot Gmail. Some 90%+ of Google's income comes from its home page. Not even Adsense, which ads a few percentage points. So no, Google hasn't had a single success in any area apart from search, even though they've been trying to diversify like crazy because they are really scared of what may happen if they lose their search engine domination. The problem is, by doing all this free stuff everywhere about the only thing they achieve is that they technically cannot "fail". Sure, you don't set revenue targets, you just burn cash, what's a failure?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+100
Thanks Vangrieg, you beat me to it
vangrieg said:
Chrome Web Browser? A success? You must be kidding me. No, I'm not saying it's a bad product. But can you imagine how much money a promo campaign like Google did for Chrome, would cost a third party? So you spend billions of dollars (even though "virtual" in this case) and get absolutely laughable market share. Success?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is success, even though the way to reach it is.... strange!?
But are Microsoft doing any better? They're just buying off companies if they need a new feature.
Google is buying new companies if they need a new feature - Android and YouTube are good examples. Microsoft isn't much better, but they have at least 2.5 sources of income - Windows, Office and Server/Tools. Now, that's a much better success because they sell that stuff. You have to be a complete loser to provide something that usually costs money for free, having a huge pile of cash and the world's largest web ad brokerage to not get a sizable market share. Yet Google does it all the time with Buzzes, Waves and all that acid-driven stuff that even tech savvy people rarely understand. And yeah, they'll muck up more than once with Android, the patent protection issue for OEMs is just the first bell that rang.
vangrieg said:
.. You have to be a complete loser to provide something that usually costs money for free ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
xda-developers provide a lot of free stuff, are they losers too? I don't think so
XDA is not a business, we're here for fun. Oh, and one little nuance, XDA doesn't have 20 billion dollars to burn and can't put an ad on every freakin' web site out there.
Dukenukemx said:
Windows Mobile BAD
#1 Lots of problems with 3D acceleration support. Mainly due to OpenGL ES drivers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not a deficiency of Windows Mobile, it's a deficiency of phones manufactured by HTC. Users of the Toshiba TG01 and Acer neoTouch are very happy with their 3D support, and indeed with their hardware-accelerated video playback of virtually any codec and wrapper format.
vangrieg said:
Google is buying new companies if they need a new feature - Android and YouTube are good examples. Microsoft isn't much better, but they have at least 2.5 sources of income - Windows, Office and Server/Tools. Now, that's a much better success because they sell that stuff. You have to be a complete loser to provide something that usually costs money for free, having a huge pile of cash and the world's largest web ad brokerage to not get a sizable market share. Yet Google does it all the time with Buzzes, Waves and all that acid-driven stuff that even tech savvy people rarely understand. And yeah, they'll muck up more than once with Android, the patent protection issue for OEMs is just the first bell that rang.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't understand it as well, but seems like it's working for them. Microsoft offer more products because they are around way longer. Google are only here for roughly 10 years. Look up what MS had to offer after 10 years of existence, which was in 1985.
Actually, if you carefully listen to what Google execs say, it's not working for them. They are very nervous. I agree that one of the key problems is that they just started to diversify. They are doing too many mistakes though which are relatively easy to avoid. It's actually a funny phenomenon you can often see in companies driven by engineers because they're so into technologies and inventions and such that they just can't resist pushing their cool new things out the door. Google is in fact a lot like Microsoft, only less mature and disciplined, in this regard. A contrast to this approach is Apple where hardly anyone ever sees a beta product, and the company is incredibly focused.
Apart from product development, there's one more thing where Google doesn't have a lot of experience, and that's partnering with others. Jobs once said that he absolutely admires Gates's abilities in this regard, saying that in fact, with all the spats, fan base animosity, tensions and all, Microsoft is the only long-term partner Apple has had through all these years, and the partnership works amazingly well for both parties. He even noted that MS is the second largest developer of software for Apple products after Apple. Google has a long way to learn how to maze through all these issues and make lasting relationships. It's one thing to attract everyone with a free product and give OEMs better bargaining position against Microsoft with a mobile OS, it's a totally different thing to carry it on to market leadership with so many conflicting interests and challenges.
Sure OEMs flirt with open source OSes, IBMs and HPs of the world are investing a lot of resources into Linux development and all, but at the end of the day which OS shows up as "recommended" on their web sites? Sure HTC is all about Android, Open Handset Alliance and all that PR stuff these days, but what does its CEO say when asked why HD2 was a WM device? "We have to take care of Windows Mobile first".
WhyBe said:
What happens when Android becomes the NEW Windows Mobile?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is not going to happen.
Contrary to what some people believe, "fragmentation" does not hurt Android much and it's not what made Windows Mobile die.
Windows Mobile died, because it got zero support from Microsoft over many years. There was no money and no developers. They could easily have made it competitive to the iPhone within a year. But they didn't. It took them one and a half years to even figure out what to do and end all the internal battles, which is an eternity in the mobile space.
Google stand behind their mobile OS and you can be sure that they will fix any problems that emerge. If fragmentation becomes too much of an issue, they'll fix it. If the UI gets outdated, they'll fix it. Microsoft didn't fix anything.
And aside from that, it will take Windows Phone 7 at least another year, to even become an option. Handsets must be launched, bugs will have to be fixed and the Marketplace has to be filled. Only then will it be competitive, if ever.
That's plenty of time before you can even consider Windows Phone 7, thus switching to Android now is not wasted money.
RAMMANN said:
I don't understand it as well, but seems like it's working for them. Microsoft offer more products because they are around way longer. Google are only here for roughly 10 years. Look up what MS had to offer after 10 years of existence, which was in 1985.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How can you compare this?
A lot of what Google has done the last 10 years is based on what MS and others made possible the first 10 years.
It's like saying that Ferrari has accomplished more then Ford because they have made better and faster cars the last 10 years then Ford did the first 10.
Ferrari might not have existed today if their wasn't someone that made engines and wheels before them.
Android is the first (open source) Linux OS that has been sold on a device. although you call it open source it's not more open the WM or iPhone.
Google is controlling the development of the OS and anyone can make applications for it.. whats the difference now between android, WM or iPhone? and witch one of them is most open source? all of them have the same. A company that develops the OS and developers making the apps.
I only see MS going less open source with WP7.
and to not having porn apps and other stuff on iPhone well jailbreak and you have it.
Now some will say you can't do anything without jailbraking an iphone. Well without Hard spl you are also kind of sucked on WM.
Android has already several updates and can't be run by all older devices.
WM also have a few updates but a wizard that is quite an old device can run WM 6.5.
We have been getting off topic in the advanrtages of WP7 or andriod and iphone. So let's take the discussion to one thread with an all out brawl between the three
With the recent announcement from apple I think Microsoft will have no choice but to throw everything they have at WP7 coming out the gates in order to compete. I think Apple's annoucement of a gamer community was a real low blow and Microsoft's xbox live offering but atleast xbox live can span platforms for right now that keeps an advantage.
vangrieg said:
Me, I love to see things escalating in this market - it just smells great phones! Redmond must be pissed off now - I suspect Apple just stole their show. I suspected something like iPhone's new approach to multitasking in WP7, there are hints this was the plan. I don't feel like its the end of the world for them, they have a lot of patience and recently decided to invest a billion dollars into their mobile platform. Let's not forget that there are advantages and disadvantages to being the first mover, and Microsoft has a lot of information about where others succeeded and failed. Remember XBox? they came late to the party Sony was ruling, but it's all different now.
As regards Android, I wouldn't expect dramatic changes from this side now. It's a successful platform, there's no sense of urgency, and Google usually dramatically reduces investment after initial rapid development. Political issues will prevent platform unification and radical changes in their policies towards OEMs, and there's just too much talk about freedom and openness and all that to reverse the course even a little bit. Especially given that not everyone even sees dangers here.
It's going to be a great year.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with all of that. The more competition there is out there the harder all the companies have to work and that is always a plus for the consumer. I predict alot more out of WP7 just because of these announcements from Apple. As far as google goes, the platform is already so open what more can they add? It's about to the point where the only thing they can do is take things away.
I agree. I strongly disapprove of Apple, but this was a slick move. As far as multitasking goes; I always thought Microsoft would probably bring multitasking in an update down the road. My guess is now they are just going to haul ass and get it out with the release. But I still don;t think it will be full 100% multitasking, more like iPhone OS 4.
A big worry I have is that Microsoft will now hurry along with things trying to make WP7 better, and rush it too much. But they still definitely have time to fix some things.
I also agree about Android. My guess is that most of what is done with Android will be done through OEM's and carriers. If phones like the Droid get advertised for the phone's specific qualities, I think Android will continue to see success. Android apps are really picking up, as is the number of devs.
So yeah, when it comes down to it we the consumers will likely have a good (but with some possible pains) year.
Google have already announced that they are slowing down development of the core OS as it's stable, and will concentrate on applications. The whole point of the platform is being a showcase for Google services, and I'm sure we will not only see new apps for Android itself but also ports to other platforms.
Well I don't think Microsoft need to push full multitasking anyway. I believe get letting some services run like how iPhone 4.0 is going to do it is a great way to do it. Why have the whole app run in the background when you just need what you don't actually have to look at run. This could be great for navigation. Still give you turn by turn in the background without have to show the map when you want to look at something else.
I don't think Microsoft will rush a broken SO out the door this time. They've come a long way and Windows 7 prove it. By far, the most complete and stable OS to hit the market for them. I bet they make sure WP7 does the same.
vangrieg said:
Google have already announced that they are slowing down development of the core OS as it's stable, and will concentrate on applications. The whole point of the platform is being a showcase for Google services, and I'm sure we will not only see new apps for Android itself but also ports to other platforms.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've seen some TV's will be powered by android in the future. I think spreading across platforms is really what Google was looking for.
Kloc said:
Well I don't think Microsoft need to push full multitasking anyway. I believe get letting some services run like how iPhone 4.0 is going to do it is a great way to do it. Why have the whole app run in the background when you just need what you don't actually have to look at run. This could be great for navigation. Still give you turn by turn in the background without have to show the map when you want to look at something else.
I don't think Microsoft will rush a broken SO out the door this time. They've come a long way and Windows 7 prove it. By far, the most complete and stable OS to hit the market for them. I bet they make sure WP7 does the same.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I don't think you're trending MS correctly...XP was great and stable for it's time but it was a fixed version of windows 98. Windows 7 is a fixed version of Vista. MS usually needs a meh product to build upon to actually make a good one, or sometimes 2 meh projects like IE 7 & 8...but IE 9 looks pretty good so far if they can get it out the door within the year anyway.
You could make the arguement that the precedessor of wp7 is the Zune though...but MS is bringing that Zune experience and intregrating it with phone services, it's a way bigger conceptual step than 98 -> XP or Vista -> 7. We'll see how this all plays out as far as stability is concerned though.
I've seen some TV's will be powered by android in the future. I think spreading across platforms is really what Google was looking for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That much is obvious...it's google's business model...produce free stuff, get people to use it...get as much data as you can from the user through their auto-opt-in policies to better target you with Ads. TV is a good market for google to target custom ads to users. But it's this same philosophy that causes me to dislike Google. However, I think that I'd preferr if Google showed me commercials I'm interested in rather than just watching whatever crap commericals the networks felt like showing me...but that's way way in the future, when set-top boxes are more just internet DRM'd devices.
gom99 said:
Well I don't think you're trending MS correctly...XP was great and stable for it's time but it was a fixed version of windows 98. Windows 7 is a fixed version of Vista.
MS usually needs a meh product to build upon to actually make a good one, or sometimes 2 meh projects like IE 7 & 8...but IE 9 looks pretty good so far if they can get it out the door within the year anyway.
You could make the arguement that the precedessor of wp7 is the Zune though...but MS is bringing that Zune experience and intregrating it with phone services. We'll see how this all plays out as far as stability is concerned though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see what you're saying. What I'm trying to put across is that MS is realizing that usability and fluidity is what the market is going towards and away from strict functionality. They are focusing more on ways to make sure programs released for their OS work better because usually when software doesn't work now a days especially on a phone OS the user contributes it to being a bad phone and not just bad software. I think they understand this now and are going to make it happen right out the gate and not have to learn from past mistakes like they did with previous platforms. Of course they'll have to add on to WP7 in their next iterations and we will probably say that's what WP7 should have looked like to begin with but we will continue to say that to anything with an update that adds features. I liked Vista when I used it more so then XP and now I like 7 even better. As long as they are taking strides forward I'm a happy camper along for the ride.
gom99 said:
Well I don't think you're trending MS correctly...XP was great and stable for it's time but it was a fixed version of windows 98. Windows 7 is a fixed version of Vista. MS usually needs a meh product to build upon to actually make a good one, or sometimes 2 meh projects like IE 7 & 8...but IE 9 looks pretty good so far if they can get it out the door within the year anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I love it when people who have no idea what they're talking about, try and talk anyway.
1. There were three versions of Windows between Windows 98 and XP: Windows 98 Second Edition, Windows ME, and Windows 2000. Windows 2000 was an exemplary OS, Windows 98SE was a good OS (9.x kernel made everything it touched subpar imo), and Windows ME was a pathetic OS.
2. Vista was fine. The only reason Vista was terrible was because people plugged XP (XP was NT5.1, for reference) drivers into Vista (Vista was NT6.0) and then gnashed their teeth when the OS didn't work properly.
Major kernel revision, you should be praising M$ that the drivers worked at all.
And then there was the fact that Vista was a very forward-thinking OS, and the average consumer-grade hardware at the time wasn't built to maximize Vista's potential. Once your hardware was adequate, Vista out-performed XP. Sure 7 is better than Vista, but that's not the point.
3. IE8 is a good browser. I use it on some of my PCs, and I have no complaints. Obviously there is some issue with standards compliance, but IE8 is a step in the right direction. If the web developers know how to properly take advantage of IE8's doctype sniffing, it's very close to standards complaint. There are a few things it doesn't implement, but for the most part it's pretty good.
Spike15 said:
I love it when people who have no idea what they're talking about, try and talk anyway.
1. There were three versions of Windows between Windows 98 and XP: Windows 98 Second Edition, Windows ME, and Windows 2000. Windows 2000 was an exemplary OS, Windows 98SE was a good OS (9.x kernel made everything it touched subpar imo), and Windows ME was a pathetic OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sigh, if you're going to insult me at least do it correctly.
Windows 2000 was a replacement for Windows NT so it was more business related than general consumer related. Instead of Windows 2000 replacing Windows 98 they released Windows 98 2nd Edition. Yes Windows ME was supposed to replace 98 but it was a failure, but that's just another one of MSes blunders on the way to XP.
XP united the fragmentation of the 2000 line and the ME line. But yes, I guess you're right XP was built from things they learned in 2000, failures of ME, and things people liked from their flagship consumer product at the time which was 98.
Spike15 said:
2. Vista was fine. The only reason Vista was terrible was because people plugged XP (XP was NT5.1, for reference) drivers into Vista (Vista was NT6.0) and then gnashed their teeth when the OS didn't work properly.
Major kernel revision, you should be praising M$ that the drivers worked at all.
And then there was the fact that Vista was a very forward-thinking OS, and the average consumer-grade hardware at the time wasn't built to maximize Vista's potential. Once your hardware was adequate, Vista out-performed XP. Sure 7 is better than Vista, but that's not the point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Vista bombed because MS didn't coordinate well with driver manufacturers and it was a buggy launch. And it was a fairly big shift from XP, the shift from vista to 7 is less significant, vista drivers tend to work fine in 7 where as that's not the case in xp -> vista.
Also Vista was a fairly bloated OS. It's memory consumption of core services was higher than windows 7. I can't even imagine Vista running on a netbook.
Vista eventually became a pretty good experience a few months down the line, but it's reputation was sown in, and it was still bloated.
Spike15 said:
3. IE8 is a good browser. I use it on s
ome of my PCs, and I have no complaints. Obviously there is some issue with standards compliance, but IE8 is a step in the right direction. If the web developers know how to properly take advantage of IE8's doctype sniffing, it's very close to standards complaint. There are a few things it doesn't implement, but for the most part it's pretty good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The differences in browsers isn't as significant to the time when ie6 became very dated and things like opera and ff were clearly better for a time. Things are a bit closer, but IE8's javascript support is pretty lacking if you look at benchmarks.
ie9 looks to be much faster than ie8 and it's adding more hardware support for GPUs. Also if ie9 adopts Pivot's zooming scroll bar, that will be an amazing feature.
gom99 said:
Sigh, if you're going to insult me at least do it correctly.
Windows 2000 was a replacement for Windows NT so it was more business related than general consumer related. Instead of Windows 2000 replacing Windows 98 they released Windows 98 2nd Edition. Yes Windows ME was supposed to replace 98 but it was a failure, but that's just another one of MSes blunders on the way to XP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Windows 2000 was the beginning of the end of Windows 9.x. Sure they released ME after 2000, but 2000 was really the end of Microsoft's dedication to 9.x (as evidenced by ME's performance...).
The only reason that it took so long for the market to shift was because driver manufacturers were deeply entrenched in 9.x and didn't want to develop for the new model that NT presented (which was a lot more restrictive since Windows NT was actually a proper, multi-user, hybrid kernel operating system rather than a single-user, monolithic kernel operating system which allow most (all?) drivers to run in kernel mode.
Windows ME failed (or, at least that's the story) for roughly the same reason. It was an attempt at reforming the Windows 9.x driver model, but instead people just stuck Windows 98SE drivers in it.
I've seen quite a few consumer desktops that were sold with Windows 2000. They're not so plentiful, but they exist, and most of the people who had them swear by them.
gom99 said:
XP united the fragmentation of the 2000 line and the ME line. But yes, I guess you're right XP was built from things they learned in 2000, failures of ME, and things people liked from their flagship consumer product at the time which was 98.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's not really much different between XP and 2000.
gom99 said:
Vista bombed because MS didn't coordinate well with driver manufacturers and it was a buggy launch. And it was a fairly big shift from XP, the shift from vista to 7 is less significant, vista drivers tend to work fine in 7 where as that's not the case in xp -> vista.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While what you're saying about driver manufacturers may be true, I disagree that Vista was a "buggy launch". I replaced XP with Vista (64-bit at that!) the moment it went gold, and never looked back...never had any serious problems with performance or compatibility either.
Now, I have to quantify that. I was running a new PC that was relatively top-of-the-line with hardware from big name manufacturers. Therefore, the driver support was good and the hardware was of the calibre that Vista was designed to capitalize on.
I ran Vista until Windows 7 RC, and in that time had 4 crashes:
3 BSoDs from nVidia drivers (graphics drivers still run in kernel mode... : ( )
1 full system lock-up from a hard drive crash (!)
You can't blame those on the operating system.
gom99 said:
The differences in browsers isn't as significant to the time when ie6 became very dated and things like opera and ff were clearly better for a time. Things are a bit closer, but IE8's javascript support is pretty lacking if you look at benchmarks.
ie9 looks to be much faster than ie8 and it's adding more hardware support for GPUs. Also if ie9 adopts Pivot's zooming scroll bar, that will be an amazing feature.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll admit that I'm psyched about IE9 -- Microsoft looks like they're fully throwing themselves behind their browser for the first time since IE4 or 5.
As for IE8's JavaScript benchmarks, I don't consider poor benchmarking (and I'll admit that it's poor benchmarking) a lack of support per se. It's still lamentable, but IE in general has a lot more compatibility code than other browsers...trying to maintain/achieve standards compliance while still fully supporting "quirks" mode...
-_-
Spike15 said:
Windows 2000 was the beginning of the end of Windows 9.x. Sure they released ME after 2000, but 2000 was really the end of Microsoft's dedication to 9.x (as evidenced by ME's performance...).
...
There's not really much different between XP and 2000.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I don't know about beginning of the end, since it was meant to run parrallel. Originally they wanted 2000 to replace 98, but it wasn't "there" for consumers yet, so it just replaced NT.
And the differences between 2000 and XP have to do with the consumer items packaged allong with XP as well as full support for things like gaming and such. Since XP was the merger of consumer and business users.
Spike15 said:
While what you're saying about driver manufacturers may be true, I disagree that Vista was a "buggy launch". I replaced XP with Vista (64-bit at that!) the moment it went gold, and never looked back...never had any serious problems with performance or compatibility either.
Now, I have to quantify that. I was running a new PC that was relatively top-of-the-line with hardware from big name manufacturers. Therefore, the driver support was good and the hardware was of the calibre that Vista was designed to capitalize on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even with a top of the line computer if you had the nvidia chipset on your mb, getting Vista at launch was not a good ordeal. The nvidia chipset is no small isolated chipset either. Not every single hardware configuration failed, and some machines did have a good experience with Vista at launch. But a significant portion did not, which cause a bad stigma for Vista.
On top of that, it took significantly more memory just to run a barebones version than XP. I forget the hard numbers, but I think Windows 7 takes half as much ram as vista did.
Spike15 said:
I'll admit that I'm psyched about IE9 -- Microsoft looks like they're fully throwing themselves behind their browser for the first time since IE4 or 5.
As for IE8's JavaScript benchmarks, I don't consider poor benchmarking (and I'll admit that it's poor benchmarking) a lack of support per se. It's still lamentable, but IE in general has a lot more compatibility code than other browsers...trying to maintain/achieve standards compliance while still fully supporting "quirks" mode...
-_-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IE9's success will be determined by how quickly they can release it. Firefox is already working on hardware acceleration too. IE is playing catchup as far as javascript, html5, and css standards are concerened. But if they can get that worked out, and get their hardware acceleration worked out. Extra features with a more pivot like style, and get it out of the door by the end of the year, they'll have a really good product at a really good time.
gom99 said:
Even with a top of the line computer if you had the nvidia chipset on your mb, getting Vista at launch was not a good ordeal. The nvidia chipset is no small isolated chipset either. Not every single hardware configuration failed, and some machines did have a good experience with Vista at launch. But a significant portion did not, which cause a bad stigma for Vista.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had an nVidia chipset, as I had in most of my PCs up until my last one (Intel chipset -- core i7 x58 system), and I had no problems other than those specified.
I think that with operating systems like these though, the first major kernel revision obviously is not going to do as well as the second. With the first you have a major change under the hood, and the end user doesn't really understand why they can't just stuff in their old drivers and be good to go.
Plus, hardware manufacturers are still learning how to properly code for the new model.
Once the second revision comes out, everyone has it figured out. It's not really a fault of the operating system manufacturer, but more a necessary evil of the way things work.
Spike15 said:
I had an nVidia chipset, as I had in most of my PCs up until my last one (Intel chipset -- core i7 x58 system), and I had no problems other than those specified.
I think that with operating systems like these though, the first major kernel revision obviously is not going to do as well as the second. With the first you have a major change under the hood, and the end user doesn't really understand why they can't just stuff in their old drivers and be good to go.
Plus, hardware manufacturers are still learning how to properly code for the new model.
Once the second revision comes out, everyone has it figured out. It's not really a fault of the operating system manufacturer, but more a necessary evil of the way things work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://arstechnica.com/hardware/new...it-paints-picture-of-buggy-nvidia-drivers.ars
M$ didn't coordinate with Driver manufacturers?!?! Come on!! It came out in beta MONTHS before the OS was even released ANYONE could download and try it. The manufacturers are lazy, simple. Is it no surprise that W7 has taken off, because the drivers for vista dont need much change so therefore manufacturers will do it but a large kernel change and manufacturers twiddle their thumbs and blame M$.
I used Vista for years and never had a problem.
Back to the phones!
In order of greatness
Android > iPhone > WM6.5 > WM6.1 > WP7
Android has the best mix of features with eye candy, and WM6.x is... well... windows 3.1 on a phone.
Jamoflaw said:
M$ didn't coordinate with Driver manufacturers?!?! Come on!! It came out in beta MONTHS before the OS was even released ANYONE could download and try it. The manufacturers are lazy, simple. Is it no surprise that W7 has taken off, because the drivers for vista dont need much change so therefore manufacturers will do it but a large kernel change and manufacturers twiddle their thumbs and blame M$.
I used Vista for years and never had a problem.
Back to the phones!
In order of greatness
Android > iPhone > WM6.5 > WM6.1 > WP7
Android has the best mix of features with eye candy, and WM6.x is... well... windows 3.1 on a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're putting the iphone that high really? Why do you like it? It's fluid sure but its like a fisher price toy in terms of what you can do with it. It's a program launcher with apps. The next release does look better with all the things they are adding but as of now it sucks if you have any ounce of nerd in you.
I'm not sure where WP7 sits as of now because it's not out yet but I've used Android and I currently use WM 6.1 here's my line-up.
WM 6.x>Android>iPhone
Kloc said:
You're putting the iphone that high really? Why do you like it? It's fluid sure but its like a fisher price toy in terms of what you can do with it. It's a program launcher with apps. The next release does look better with all the things they are adding but as of now it sucks if you have any ounce of nerd in you.
I'm not sure where WP7 sits as of now because it's not out yet but I've used Android and I currently use WM 6.1 here's my line-up.
WM 6.x>Android>iPhone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have to preface that ranking saying "for advanced users". Even just looking at the side-by-side they have on engadget...wm 6.5 dominates that considering that a few of their "facts" are just taking into account wm 6.5 stock.
But I do like that the iphone added some nice features, even though some of them are hypocritical, but that's apple for you. From what Jobs was saying, I thought Folders were too complicated, and people just liked swiping their fingers through 100 applications.
I wouldn't put iPhone > WM6.5. They're different, though iPhone keeps getting better, WM6.5 not.
Android, of course, beats them all.
Android >> iPhone = WM6.5 > WM6.1 = WP7
Since this thread is going too off-topic, I want to have my own, for my comparison. See here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=6132000#post6132000
Sethos II said:
Here's my comparison between WP7, iPhone OS, Android and WM6.5!
It's been about time that somebody did it.
It's a work in progress, I will add and update things.
Feel free to post your comments, I will consider them for updates to the chart.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
gom99 said:
Well I don't think you're trending MS correctly...XP was great and stable for it's time but it was a fixed version of windows 98. Windows 7 is a fixed version of Vista. MS usually needs a meh product to build upon to actually make a good one, or sometimes 2 meh projects like IE 7 & 8...but IE 9 looks pretty good so far if they can get it out the door within the year anyway.
You could make the arguement that the precedessor of wp7 is the Zune though...but MS is bringing that Zune experience and intregrating it with phone services, it's a way bigger conceptual step than 98 -> XP or Vista -> 7. We'll see how this all plays out as far as stability is concerned though.
That much is obvious...it's google's business model...produce free stuff, get people to use it...get as much data as you can from the user through their auto-opt-in policies to better target you with Ads. TV is a good market for google to target custom ads to users. But it's this same philosophy that causes me to dislike Google. However, I think that I'd preferr if Google showed me commercials I'm interested in rather than just watching whatever crap commericals the networks felt like showing me...but that's way way in the future, when set-top boxes are more just internet DRM'd devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A fixed version of win 98 ?? They dont even run the same file system. They are so different. XP was built off of 2000
ilmar72 said:
A fixed version of win 98 ?? They dont even run the same file system. They are so different. XP was built off of 2000
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Multi-user" and "hybrid kernel" would've been the two biggest changes I would've selected for "they don't even [...]", but to each his or her own...
Spike15 said:
"Multi-user" and "hybrid kernel" would've been the two biggest changes I would've selected for "they don't even [...]", but to each his or her own...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd have to go with you on that one. Win ME and below use hybrid 16/32 kernal while NT+ uses 32. That's a pretty significant change.
Ok, so here is my theory why it is taking Microsoft so long to release updates and bug fixes. I think the Windows Phone team is currently recoding Metro to run on top of Windows 8 instead of Windows CE. All the updates they are talking about down the road will be integrated into the new Windows 8 platform. Anyone else think this may be the case.
randude said:
Ok, so here is my theory why it is taking Microsoft so long to release updates and bug fixes. I think the Windows Phone team is currently recoding Metro to run on top of Windows 8 instead of Windows CE. All the updates they are talking about down the road will be integrated into the new Windows 8 platform. Anyone else think this may be the case.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That'd be EPIC if it were true.
I'm fairly confident that WP8 will indeed run ontop of Windows 8.
why ?
why would you want wp8 when 7 is still so immature ? a complete rewrite again ? id rather see wp7 mature and actually be updated as promised before a new version was beta'd.
ohgood said:
why would you want wp8 when 7 is still so immature ? a complete rewrite again ? id rather see wp7 mature and actually be updated as promised before a new version was beta'd.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I very much enjoy my WP7 device thank you. There is no reason for me not to want a WP8 next year.
In any case, merging Windows CE and Windows "proper" makes perfect sense. I see no good reason to maintain two completely different codebases (Windows CE and Windows 8) once Windows runs on ARM. In many ways there is no need for a complete rewrite as Windows CE (albeit very old) was always the ARM (or, mobile if you wish) version of Windows - it includes many of the very same underlaying principles.
What many people are missing is that WP7 is not an OS as such, the OS is Windows CE. WP7 is the shell. Porting this to Windows 8 should require much less effort than maintaining WinCE.
Since [most] all third-party WP7 apps are frameworked it also means any existing apps will work on WP8.
If done correctly (and I know, this is Microsoft we are talking about - chances are slim) it would also enable devs to code/design apps for Windows Phone and Windows Slate simultaneously. Rather than offer two different versions the app would adapt to the form-factor it's currently running on.
I think they have to. Especially at the rate the competition is going, they will have to merge. They will have to do it fast, if they want to stay relevant.
from what I've read, many people feel that Microsoft will release "Mango" as 7.5, and then WP8 to coencide with Windows 8...bumping up a version number doesn't mean it's a total rewrite...just that it adds enough features to be considered a major enough update to get a new number. For example, iOS 4 wasn't a rewrite of iOS 3, and android 2.x isn't a total rewrite of android 1.x
vetvito said:
I think they have to. Especially at the rate the competition is going, they will have to merge. They will have to do it fast, if they want to stay relevant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, and I'm sure Apple is going to have OS/X on Phones and Tablets next year.
I swear some of you people don't even think this through completely before making such baseless statements.
There's nothing saying they have to merge.
Windows just needed ARM support, which is basically done (and Microsoft probably was working on it for years beforehand - CE already basically worked on ARM and they've supported other platforms in the past) and of course another UI layer which they are working on.
However, this says nothing about the tons of Windows Apps which are optimized for non-touch keyboard+mouse use that will be basically broken on a touchscreen device.
You can use any HP touchscreen computer and see just how clunky a Win32 application is on a touchscreen computer. I don't see a majority of vendors running to revamp their application UIs to support touch, and a UI layer cannot do this on the fly due to the multitude of layouts, etc. used in Win32 applications.
Most vendors will basically have to create a touch and non-touch version of their applications.
That's why Apple is using iOS and not OS/X on their iPad. Icons and Widgets work better on larger tablet screens than Tiles, so while WP7 looks great on phones and certainly scales really well to larger/higher res displays... It would look terribad on a tablet, and lead to a ridiculous amount of wasted screen real estate.
I swear you must have misinterpreted my post.
Who said anything about OSX on a phone?
Jobs already said that wouldn't happen. IOS, WebOS(debatable) , and Android will continue to pave the future. Unless Microsoft does something, and I'm not talking about a Windows 7 tablet.
Windows is slow as hell compared to the competition. Look at Windows Media Center, and loom at Google TV, Apple TV.
ohgood said:
why would you want wp8 when 7 is still so immature ? a complete rewrite again ? id rather see wp7 mature and actually be updated as promised before a new version was beta'd.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That does not explain why MS failed to solve all the bugs listed here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=9153088&postcount=1
the NoDo update, that arrived so late, shall logically have solved must of the above mentioned bugs/issues. But it didn't.
What are MS waiting for? They behave like they have no competitors.
If the applications are all managed code than who cares whether it's WinCE or Win32?
vangrieg said:
If the applications are all managed code than who cares whether it's WinCE or Win32?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are some differences between Silverlight on Windows Phone and Desktop. I believe Silverlight on Windows Phone is a fork of Silverlight 3, whereas the desktop is currently Silverlight 4. It'd be nice to see them converge at Silverlight 5 (crossing fingers for MIX 2011). I've heard plenty of rumors that Microsoft is at work on the compatibility issues.
Sure, but Silverlight can be updated with or without changing the underlying OS.
N8ter said:
I swear some of you people don't even think this through completely before making such baseless statements.
There's nothing saying they have to merge.
Windows just needed ARM support, which is basically done (and Microsoft probably was working on it for years beforehand - CE already basically worked on ARM and they've supported other platforms in the past) and of course another UI layer which they are working on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right - there is nothing saying they have to. It makes sense business wise though. Rather than having two teams working full out maintaining two similar yet very different OSes they can have one team working on maintaining one OS running on both platforms.
CE does run on ARM, it has done so for years and it's been in use in the enterprise sector for as long. Problem is, WinCE, even in it's later versions is old tech. Not just from a UI perspective but the core OS is old tech.
N8ter said:
However, this says nothing about the tons of Windows Apps which are optimized for non-touch keyboard+mouse use that will be basically broken on a touchscreen device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They won't be broken. They will function just as they have always done - with a mouse and/or keyboard. You can't take any old Win32 app and run it on ARM anyway, that's not the idea behind it at all.
N8ter said:
Most vendors will basically have to create a touch and non-touch version of their applications.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, no. They don't have to do anything of the kind. They can do so to stay relevant - especially if their app is the type of app that would be useful on a tablet, but they don't have to. Just because Win8 will have a tablet specific UI does not mean it will not also have the old desktop UI we're all used to. You need to make a distinction between OS and UI, they are two very different things.
arturobandini said:
That does not explain why MS failed to solve all the bugs listed here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=9153088&postcount=1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I agree, there are still some bugs in the OS, NoDo did fix the major ones. Most of the remaining ones are non reproducible or actually "as designed". Also, many of them are not OS bugs but rather bugs that only appear on certain handsets.
PG2G said:
There are some differences between Silverlight on Windows Phone and Desktop. I believe Silverlight on Windows Phone is a fork of Silverlight 3, whereas the desktop is currently Silverlight 4. It'd be nice to see them converge at Silverlight 5 (crossing fingers for MIX 2011). I've heard plenty of rumors that Microsoft is at work on the compatibility issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, but that's of little concern really. As long as SLx is backwards compatible - which it will be, all existing apps will continue to run just fine. Also, with Silverlight finally coming to the Xbox they have all three screens covered (personally I would have preferred a new iteration of Media Center, but there's still time for that) - TV, Desktop and Mobile. The idea is that we as developers can code/design for the audience rather than the platform. Great things ahead if you ask me.
vetvito said:
I swear you must have misinterpreted my post.
Who said anything about OSX on a phone?
Jobs already said that wouldn't happen. IOS, WebOS(debatable) , and Android will continue to pave the future. Unless Microsoft does something, and I'm not talking about a Windows 7 tablet.
Windows is slow as hell compared to the competition. Look at Windows Media Center, and loom at Google TV, Apple TV.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AppleTV and GoogleTV are Appliance products. Microsoft did have a TV thing a while back, but that's another story. Windows Media Center is fine.
If people aren't expecting Apple to put OS/X on tablets, etc. Why would you make a statement basically they have no choice but to merge WP7 and Windows eventually?
Also, I was talking about Windows 8 (which runs on ARM, and is coming with touch UI), not Windows 7...
N8ter said:
AppleTV and GoogleTV are Appliance products. Microsoft did have a TV thing a while back, but that's another story. Windows Media Center is fine.
If people aren't expecting Apple to put OS/X on tablets, etc. Why would you make a statement basically they have no choice but to merge WP7 and Windows eventually?
Also, I was talking about Windows 8 (which runs on ARM, and is coming with touch UI), not Windows 7...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My choice of words was wrong. My bad. I was meaning that they should do something, something faster than what they are doing. Phones are moving closer and closer to PC capabilities.
Windows Media Center sucks balls compared to Google TV, and Apple TV. I'm seriously thinking about throwing my HTPC out the window. Its embarrassing. I mentioned it because Microsoft basically invented this market, and now they've been left behind. Sort of like what's going on now.
vetvito said:
Windows Media Center sucks balls compared to Google TV, and Apple TV. I'm seriously thinking about throwing my HTPC out the window. Its embarrassing. I mentioned it because Microsoft basically invented this market, and now they've been left behind. Sort of like what's going on now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Windows Media Center is still the absolute best platform out there. Google TV has nothing on MC7. That said, they [MS] have definitely mismanaged the "platform", I say "platform" because Microsoft never saw it as a platform (God knows why?!). WES (Windows Embedded - which is basically a modularized version of Windows 7) should change this though. There were a few MC7 appliances on show at CES earlier this year and if they can deliver they will kill the competition.
From a WAF perspective nothing is close to MC7. From a live TV perspective the other platforms aren't even in the same ballpark.
emigrating said:
Windows Media Center is still the absolute best platform out there. Google TV has nothing on MC7. That said, they [MS] have definitely mismanaged the "platform", I say "platform" because Microsoft never saw it as a platform (God knows why?!). WES (Windows Embedded - which is basically a modularized version of Windows 7) should change this though. There were a few MC7 appliances on show at CES earlier this year and if they can deliver they will kill the competition.
From a WAF perspective nothing is close to MC7. From a live TV perspective the other platforms aren't even in the same ballpark.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd like to know more. Honestly elaborate more. Media Center is awfully slow compared to Google TV. I don't have a gtv, but I demoed it. You can search for shows and the web in a overlay of what you're currently watching on gtv. On my HTPC running windows 7, that's impossible. Starting Media Center is unbelievably slow, and browsing through media in media center is not fun. Its laggy as hell. On GTV its instant.
vetvito said:
I'd like to know more. Honestly elaborate more. Media Center is awfully slow compared to Google TV. I don't have a gtv, but I demoed it. You can search for shows and the web in a overlay of what you're currently watching on gtv. On my HTPC running windows 7, that's impossible. Starting Media Center is unbelievably slow, and browsing through media in media center is not fun. Its laggy as hell. On GTV its instant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you find MC7 to be slow there is a problem with your machine (either hardware or software wise). I'm running it on several HTPCs in the house and there is no lag what so ever.
Comparing it to Google TV is kind of like comparing apples and oranges. They are both fruits, but that's pretty much it. Google TV does not have a live TV option as such - you have to feed the output of your DVR or whatever thru the gtv box. MC7 on the other hand accepts tuners (either local or remote) and acts as your DVR.
If you press the Guide button on your MC7 remote while watching TV it will overlay ontop of what you're watching, exactly like gtv. The guide is also one of the best in the industry (depending on your location of course). You also get [some] internet TV built in, but more can be added by installing a Hulu plugin. In addition you have Netflix etc.
I will agree that browsing the media on MC7 using the built-in functionality is rather lacking, but there are plenty of third-party apps that help with this. myTV is great for downloaded/recorded TV shows and My Movies is great for movies.
I've been using HTPCs for around 10 years and MC7 is IMO still the best option available and I've tried them all - multiple times
I'm running on a AMD 6000, dual core 3.2 ghz. 4gb of ram. That's more than enough for media.
Have you tried XBMC? It runs circles around Media Center. I haven't tried those plugins you mentioned, I will do that today.
With the rumor of dismal sales for the RT, I'm wondering whether Microsoft considers RT to be a dead product. I heard that one manufacturer cancelled its RT product a while back because of it.
If it's true, I wonder how much the lockdown of the system affected sales. Did a lot of closed-source applications not get made for RT because desktop applications weren't allowed? Or would they never have been ported anyway?
I highly doubt that they have given up on something so early. I happen to own the Surface RT, and find it to be so much better than comparable Android and Ipad tablets. The only things lacking in the MS store, Photoshop Touch, a true Torrent client, and Cisco VPN support, and 3d gaming. I use RDP exclusively, and find it to be the best thin client available. If MS is smart, they will outfit Surface RT2 with the Wacom digitizer. Id pay an extra 100$ for it. Microsoft will be selling 10's of millions of windows 8 devices, which means more users on the modern UI - which in turn means more incentive for developers to make applications for Windows 8, and to compile for RT. I think a year from now, RT will basically have established itself as a viable tablet operating system - if the rumors are correct and the Windows phone 8 compatibility issues are ironed out, I see an ecosystem that is second to none.
THat being said - if apple starts making touchscreen convertible macbooks that boot ios applications, MS will be in big trouble, If Apple sticks to its guns, and doesn't make macbooks, and imacs touch friendly, they will continue to see their stock drop, and MS's market share in Tablets, will inch up.
The device that your thinking of is the ativ smart tab from Samsung. It never got sold in the US and is being discontinued in Germany. I live in the UK so have had a chance to handle a store model, its actually a horrid device. It feels cheap and seemed laggier than the RT, camera had a 3 second delay on taking images and it was more expensive than the surface RT while the only feature it had which the surface didn't was a higher resolution on its camera. The surface is just far better built and looks like its worth more money than the Samsung. Samsung cited lack of consumer interest in RT for the reason to not sell it.
Toshiba were also going to release a Windows RT tablet with a Texas instruments OMAP CPU however Toshiba pulled out and TI decided to discontinue the application profile OMAP processors and focus on microcontrollers instead. HP were going to make a device using a Qualcomm CPU (as used in samsungs device) but felt that there would be no demand for RT so pulled out, dell took up their position to release an RT device instead. Acer also developed a device but it has had its launch delayed until Q2 2013, assuming they have not discontinued it entirely.
Microsoft certainly have not scrapped RT already though. The new Microsoft blue update is meant to be coming to WP8, Windows 8 and Windows RT. If they didn't believe in RT then it wouldn't be getting blue.
I wonder how things would be different if Microsoft allowed desktop applications on RT directly rather than forced the Metro crap on everyone. Would we see desktop applications on RT from big developers, or would we just see the same situation, with porting to RT not seen as worthwhile?
Some people seem to think that the problem with the RT is that it has the desktop mode at all. I don't see it that way, though. What would be so wrong with an ARM port of Windows 8?
Oh Yes They Can!
SixSixSevenSeven said:
Microsoft certainly have not scrapped RT already though. The new Microsoft blue update is meant to be coming to WP8, Windows 8 and Windows RT. If they didn't believe in RT then it wouldn't be getting blue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From an article by Preston Gralla in Computerworld "My guess is that eventually Microsoft will kill RT. Sales are dismal and don't appear to be getting better. There's no clear value in tablets that are as expensive as full-blown Windows tablets, but don't offer all of Windows features, such as the ability to run desktop applications. Having to develop, market, and support RT as well as Windows takes time and energy away from Microsoft's focus on Windows. Microsoft should follow IDC's recommendations and kill RT".
I have had several Surface RT Tablets - they remain gorgeous pieces of hardware with great battery life and screen BUT the Win RT experience was absolutely abominable, from buggy software to just plain lack of decent apps in the store, e.g., the email app.
And lest we forget, Microsoft killed Kin within three months of introing it so they can easily kill RT as well.
"There's no clear value in tablets that are as expensive as full-blown Windows tablets, but don't offer all of Windows features, such as the ability to run desktop applications. Having to develop, market, and support RT..."
It's true that we all know that Apple has cheap Ipad and that the application from the App Store are working in iMac... that comment from Preston Gralla is ridiculous...
RT
Hello, I have owned the SurfaceRT from week 3 and I find it a great device. I use to read email some games and surfing net. The last update that enables most flash sites works great. I still you my laptop for some apps but so far I have been happy with it. Much better than ipad or droid tablets I think as I have both. Just my thoughts.
MS can't abandon RT. ARM is the dominant architecture in the mobile space, and if MS wants to compete, its OS has to run on ARM. Even if Intel Atom can now reach power-efficiency parity, I really doubt we'll see $200 Intel tablets any time soon. MS needs to drop prices to compete, and only ARM provides that option.
That said, the 2012 RT devices--the few that were released--are already hitting the bargain bin. Surface RT is the last hold-out. The Teg3 SoC they're based on has been long obsolete.
RT as presently stands has no value proposition. On one side, it's usurped by Intel Atom (Clover Trail and Bay Trail by year-end); on the other, by cheaper and more functional Android tablets. Per rumors, the plan for this year is to go smaller and cheaper, with Blue. We'll see if they can compete with $200 7" and $300 10" Android tabs. Those are MS' main competitors, not iPads.
RT's fate is tied to the Metro ecosystem; if Metro does well, so will RT. Metro isn't doing well. RT is too weak to bootstrap Metro, so it falls to Win8 to get Metro viable. But Win8 isn't doing well, either. So the domino effect is: Windows doing well -> Metro ecosystem becomes viable -> RT doing well.
From recent rumors, we should see fixes and incremental improvements with Blue. Win Blue sales should likewise incrementally improve from last year's launch debacle, but I don't see breakout sales coming this year. Hence, per above factors, I don't see RT being a player this year, either.
Even if Microsoft didn't abandon their hope for RT, it seems that the rest of the world has, including most manufacturers, financial analysts, prospective buyers and etc.
I love my RT. I don't care that it runs on ARM and is not compatible with regular x86 / 64 apps. The problem is that they don't allow non-Metro apps to be developed for the RT. The sooner they get rid of this stupid restriction, the sooner RT can be revived. Hell, I'll even write my own apps, just not in Metro. It's annoyingly slow even on my desktop running on a quad core CPU and a SSD.
Microsoft can't say they didn't see this coming if the RT does fail. They dug their own grave. Of course, I'd hate to see it fail because I'm typing on one right now.
If we're supposed to do anything on the cloud, why doesn't the RT have 3g? I can't even connect to our VPN at work. This is a beautiful piece of hardware (minus the embarrassingly low quality keyboard cover), unfortunately it's crippled by Microsoft's poor decision of locking this thing down. I'm sure they have their reasons to justify this, but the fact is that average consumers don't care and they just want things to work.
I think metro is dead.it really sucks.and the metro only device(windows rt) is also dead.
When Will RT Price Reductions Begin?
It's obvious that despite a lot of good points regarding Surface RT tabs they're not selling well (if at all now). One of the reasons given is price so does anyone believe that MS will offer reduced prices in the near future in an attempt to open the market or will they just abandon?
I think the device hasn't even been out for 6 months yet and you guys are already shouting like MS's buried it. MS has already announced plans for the infrastructure(Blue), and they would have been fools to think that it would have taken off this rapidly.
Microsoft have been fools before, although often not quite so badly as people realize. It's arguable that Microsoft was foolish to put so much emphasis on Metro in general despite the half-assed (maybe 3/4-assed) way it's implemented in Win8 / RT
I really hate that I have to say it, but after anxiously waiting for my Surface RT, and dreaming of an Android-Free life. It only took a month to change my mind and abandon the RT.
And Microsoft did it to themselves...after spending a LOT of time in their help forums, it become clear to me that that a lot of people felt as I do. The real issue for me wasn't ARM or Store apps only..I fully expected that. I had no problem with a scaled down version of Office and I REALLY love the Metro interface.
However, it is the roadblocks, missing basic functions in apps, and other missteps that MS took. This is no where the complete list.
1. No support for POP3 email accounts..people don't always have choices
2. Can't send or reply emails for your Outlook.com aliases
3. Limited support for Outlook categories and other contact list info in the People app
4. No folder organization for IE favorites or import function. Why...when you have a full IE when started from Desktop mode. Why severely limit your functions just in Metro?
5. No music playlist or file sync/download between PC WMP and device. Not paying more for Xbox, don't and can't use streaming often. home group solution only works when home..this is a mobile device. I think they forgot.
6. Doesn't matter anyway, built in music players can't work with WMP playlists anyway.???
7. No direct USB connector or option for file transfers, back ups, etc. Almost every mobile device and platform has this in some form..I expect it.
8. Apps...I know it's early, but the Metro design guidelines are so easy, who know so many apps could be so ugly. I love Metro, these are so bad. Plus, apps from the big guns, like Ever note, aren't functioning well.
9. Still no tasks from Outlook. Not necessarily an RT issue, but after all this time, still can't sync my Outlook tasks and the web apps MS depends on for any sync (live mail, calendar, etc) are too simple and missing functionality. I certainly did not expect, nor should I, a full Outlook on the RT, but what we got in its place is way too basic to be usable.
10. The nightmare that is the Desktop. Everything is too small, very frustrating to work with. Two different interfaces.. It is confusing and makes no sense. Why didn't they just develop everything into Metro? 11. Finally to add insult to injury, the support website you are linked to from the HELP link in every settings menu is the wrong one. That's the full Windows 8 site, not the RT site as I and the forum moderator discovered last week.
Even in the name, MS calls it a PC, and it's got so much legacy design and function from the PC version, but it isn't a PC. its a mobile device that wasn't built with mobility in mind. Some of these are just annoying, some are problematic and most make you wonder if anyone knows what they're doing, as they make no logical sense
There is a lot to love. It wasn't all bad, just the walls I kept hitting piled up and left me for dead. With all it's headaches and nightmares, I can still do much more, much easier and more reliably with an iPhone or Android.
It's time to stop managing our tech, and expect that our tech will help manage our lives.
Thanks
Sent from my GT-P3113 using Tapatalk 2
You have nicely captured many of the problems - the real issue here is whether MS is willing to fix RT enough to make it useful. I would gladly repurchase a Surface RT tablet if they do but I have a feeling they won't as long as the current management is there - in the decade since Ballmer has taken the reins MS has become a second-rate player and management has become increasingly out of touch with reality.
Thank you
I haven't followed the leadership enough to agree or disagree with the Balmer assessment. You may be correct.
But I wonder if the problem isn't deeper and ingrained in the corporate culture. People in leadership roles that can't or don't understand this new computing era. Teams stuck in the ruts of legacy. Innovation seen as too big a risk.
I also see MS, and many of the tech companies still seperating us into two defined groups and making old assumptions regarding what we need and want. Big company/Enterprise users and casual, home users. Today, I think the majority of people sit somewhere in between. I.e. Needing the advanced functions of Outlook, but not working on an Exchange server, or can't. Wanting to manage large media libraries across platforms, devices, and with choices such as to download or cloud store and stream.
Point is, the computing landscape has expanded tremendously and user needs have increased but also diversified. We need a lot more boxes than the old two.
Sadly, since I really wanted to love it, in comparing the RT with its counterparts, Android tablets and iPads, the Surface RT turned out to be an expensive toy. (That hurt). Picked up a Samsung Galaxy Tab, and had full functionality, far beyond the Surface in hours. You name it, I had it and it worked flawlessly. Truly a night and day experience.
Still hate Android though. Evil Google......Evil.
Sent from my GT-P3113 using Tapatalk 2
Interestingly enough, I too turned back to a Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 (I read a lot as well as listen to audio books). I too dislike android but I need my Gmail, calendar, etc and most of all, alarms that work, i.e., can turn themselves on even when the tablet sleeps. That's my pet peeve with any form of mobile windows going back to WinCE.
In any case, I'd chuck the Samsung for a Surface RT if the software worked - IMHO the Surface RT is the best tablet yet!
Latest rumorz sez that updates (not Blue) to all core apps are due some time in March. These are for both Win8 and RT.
I think folks are confusing RT v1.0 for RT the platform. One thing MS is known for is persisting with money-losing projects, and RT is a long-term bet. RT will stick around, even if v1.0 is a bit wanting.
What I'm interested in is what the pitch will be for this next rev. The "hybrid w/ bundled Office" spiel didn't work out.
PROGNOSTICATOR TIME! For Win8, the easy bet is that MS will double-down on same strategy as last year: bundling freebie Office w/ 10" & smaller tabs, and relying on faster hardware (Haswell, Bay Trail), lower prices (lower licensing, cheaper touch screens), and bug-fix/improvements to Win8 (Blue) to boost sales.
For RT, reportedly MS'll go small/cheap. That would mean naked tabs w/o keyboard since that adds to the cost, and smaller tabs can't have integrated KB anyway. Whatever happens, the heavy lifting will be all on MS, as vendor buy-in for RT is minimal. I see MS soft-selling RT for this next rev, since Metro isn't yet rolling. My guess is that we'll see a refreshed 10" along with a new 7" model, both with nominal market spend.
Speaking of Surface toys, I'd expect an Atom (Bay Trail) model to bridge the huge gap between the iCore and the RT, making it 4 models in all. If there's any adult left in MS management, the keyboard widget will be included in base pricing, and the whole line should drop by $100 for all models.
These may work, depending on what the competition is doing. If Apple goes ahead with the iWatch/iTV, or if Goog Glass hits the street, then frankly it doesn't matter what MS is doing with Windows. All the buzz will go to the new toys. That's the real problem for MS, it's forever fighting last year's wars.
BTW, looks like Blue leaks have started. You can catch up on the tidbits from the usual haunts. Incremental improvements as expected. No boot-to-desktop apparent. As with past Win releases, we should see RTM in July/Aug, and RC releases will be before that, so we'll know before long what cards MS will play for this year.
if there was an intel atom powered surface out already at about the same price as the RT (I might be willing to spare an extra £50 or so) then I would be all over that. Even better if it still had the wacom digitiser of the pro.
I do want to see a 7" windows device.
Hopefully they will also broaden their distribution - letting the morons at Best Buy introduce a new product is the kiss of death and MS's own stores are too few and far between.
How you guys enjoying upside-down camera in Skype app (after latest update)? :laugh:
Are you still waiting for "WP internals 2.2"? Are you necromancers (or necrophils)? :laugh:
So, trust me (to a man who has and used WP much earlier than you heard about it), WP/W10M platform is almost dead, and damn M$ do everything to kill it (even hardware isn't too outdated). Best we can do, is to sell these damn handsets on eBay (while they cost at least a few bucks). I predict, this summer you'll not be able to sell L-950/Xl even for a $50!
Will be glad to hear any real-life arguments about latest M$ "bugdate"... BTW, if you really enjoy upside-down camera in Skype - please do not reply...
As i said in reddit, gonna quote myself.
The Microsoft CEO has no clue on what to do. Maybe Satya has some aces up his sleeve but at this point i serously doubt it. Like when you are watching The voice and you're waiting for Jesus Christ to come down and blow your head off... but Jesus Christ doesn't come.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Still happy for what my Lumia is....just a companion
The death of platform forced me (a complete Windows user without any other platform) to use my laptop most of times. For example, using Word for college work and some websites like my college one dosen't load properly on my Lumia 730. That times, when most of my friends use their phones for those tasks, I take out my trusty laptop. Even for Spotify, I hate the Mobile app but the desktop app and web works fine. So for me, the phone is just a companion not more than that at all, like others who use phones and iPads for little work.
Waiting for Surface Phone to change that and I want it to be more productive than Android/iOS.
ops
this is zambi
not dead
i hope my 950XL works one year more no (big) problems, camera is excellent...
btw... is easy to get back to AU and have less problems
dxdy said:
i hope my 950XL works one year more no (big) problems, camera is excellent...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought so but looks like M$ have a different plan Skype is a primary functionality (at least for me). What bug we should expect next? Impossibility to make phone calls or send SMS?
dxdy said:
btw... is easy to get back to AU and have less problems
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This will not solve Skype issue. And w/o updates many apps become non-working...
But the worst news is: this showstopper means - there is ABSOLUTELY NO QUALITY ASSURANCE for releases, nobody at M$ testing/care about W10M releases! What if student-intern or outsourced contractor from Bangalore, India will add a rootkit/troyan/malicious code to the next release?!
W10M become very dangerous OS, it's not safe to use it anymore...
No, it isn't dead. In fact, Microsoft released the new build 15254.158 a few days ago.
mikevespa said:
No, it isn't dead. In fact, Microsoft released the new build 15254.158 a few days ago.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a security patch... meltdown protection and other stuff... It's not like a new version of the os with features.
Sensoboston, i wat to buy your 950 xl. Detail on PM.
@augustinionut, I don't have XL. 950 only. And I'll sell 'em (we have 2) on eBay only.
I have no skype problems.
I just turned my head upside down
I suggest to the moderator of this forum, to close this thread, because it's useless and misleading. W10M is still supported and updated!
If you don't like W10M anymore, just don't use it!
mikevespa said:
I suggest to the moderator of this forum, to close this thread, because it's useless and misleading. W10M is still supported and updated!
If you don't like W10M anymore, just don't use it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No reason to close the thread honestly, if you have evidence that it is supported and updated, then post up and let's get a real conversation going. Prove the OP wrong and let's see what MS is doing that you like, or could do better.
We can keep an eye out but I haven't seen anything in this thread that would warrant it being closed.
Windows 10 Mobile really IS more dead than alive.
If I remember correctly MS promised to backport new APIs to W10M, so it could use new or updated UWP apps. This seems like just another broken promise.
As Microsoft has removed Windows 10 Mobile from the Windows 10 SDK, this is the last nail in the coffin.
"Without presence of Mobile in the SDK, no new apps can be developed, and developers can’t update their apps anymore."
"As PC moves on, Mobile has got stuck on Redstone 2. So if a developer wants to update his UWP app, he has to split it into two versions, one for Mobile and the other for rest."
"Microsoft has already stopped updating many of their apps, and it is a matter of time before other developers follow suit."
Source: https://www.windowslatest.com/2017/12/29/mentions-windows-10-mobile-removed-windows-10-sdk/
The PRODUCT_MOBILE_CORE definition is no longer needed because the core is the same and shared among PC, mobile, XBOX, HoloLens and IoT
mikevespa said:
The PRODUCT_MOBILE_CORE definition is no longer needed because the core is the same and shared among PC, mobile, XBOX, HoloLens and IoT
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source?
DECEMBER 2015 - Build 11082
https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2015/12/16/announcing-windows-10-insider-preview-build-11082/
This includes the changes that have also been going out as cumulative updates through Windows Update on your PCs running the Windows 10 November Update as well as on phones running Windows 10 too. We’re also working on some structural improvements to OneCore, which is the shared core of Windows across devices. Essentially, OneCore is the heart of Windows, and these improvements to OneCore make building Windows across PC, tablet, phone, IoT, Hololens and Xbox more efficient. We’re doing some code refactoring and other engineering work to make sure OneCore is optimally structured for teams to start checking in new features and improvements in the new year."
JANUARY 2016 - Build 11099
https://blogs.windows.com/windowsex...ncing-windows-10-insider-preview-build-11099/
"this build does not include big noticeable changes or new features yet. Our focus through the holidays was on structural improvements to OneCore, which is the shared core of Windows across devices. The code refactoring and other engineering work we’ve been doing to optimize OneCore is nearing the point where we will be ready for teams to begin checking in new features and improvements. It will still be a few builds before any really noticeable changes show up, depending on when teams begin lighting up new features in their areas. We’re excited for Insiders to use this build to validate the work we’ve been doing to OneCore, so give this build a try and let us know of any issues you run into via the Windows Feedback app."
AUGUST 2016 - Anniversary Update
https://blogs.windows.com/windowsex...indows-10-insider-preview-build-14901-for-pc/
"We are focusing on making some structural improvements to OneCore which is the shared “heart” of Windows across PC, tablet, phone, IoT, Hololens and Xbox. We’re doing some code refactoring and other engineering work to make sure OneCore is optimally structured for teams to start checking in new features and improvements in a few months. As a result, these builds may include more bugs and other issues that could be slightly more painful for some people to live with"
APRIL 2017
https://blogs.windows.com/windowsex...er-preview-build-16176-pc-build-15204-mobile/
"We are also releasing Windows 10 Mobile Insider Preview Build 15204 to Insiders in the Fast ring. As we release new builds from our Development Branch for PC, we will also be doing the same for Windows 10 Mobile just like we have been in the past. However, Windows Insiders will likely notice some minor differences. The biggest difference being that the build number and branch won’t match the builds we will be releasing for PC. This is a result of more work we’re doing to converge code into OneCore – the heart of Windows across PC, tablet, phone, IoT, HoloLens, Xbox and more as we continue to develop new improvements for Windows 10 Mobile and our enterprise customers."
mikevespa said:
APRIL 2017
https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexp...-15204-mobile/
"We are also releasing Windows 10 Mobile Insider Preview Build 15204 to Insiders in the Fast ring. As we release new builds from our Development Branch for PC, we will also be doing the same for Windows 10 Mobile just like we have been in the past. However, Windows Insiders will likely notice some minor differences. The biggest difference being that the build number and branch won’t match the builds we will be releasing for PC.
This is a result of more work we’re doing to converge code into OneCore – the heart of Windows across PC, tablet, phone, IoT, HoloLens, Xbox and more as we continue to develop new improvements for Windows 10 Mobile and our enterprise customers."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your info is from when Windows Mobile 10 was pulled out of Windows 10 "main" branch with the "feature2" branch and was basically frozen at Redstone 2. Which of course means that any further development and improvements of OneCore from there on will never reach W10M. Just like other parts of the OS will never get updated, W10M is stuck with Edge version 40 and won't get any new Cortana features.
W10M has not been part of the OneCore development since it was left behind in "feature2".
That's the reason why Microsoft said they would backport some APIs from Redstone 3 (Fall Creators Update) and Redstone 4 to W10M "feature2" / Redstone 2. But the question now is if they changed their minds, when they are already removing W10M from the Windows 10 SDK.
BTW, the "PRODUCT_MOBILE_CORE" definition has nothing to do with OneCore / Windows kernel. It's a definition in the GetProductInfo function which tells a program which product type of Windows it's running on. "_CORE" in this case is just used for basic / consumer editions, like "PRODUCT_CORE" is used for Windows 10 Home and "PRODUCT_PROFESSIONAL" is used for Windows 10 Pro. There even was a "PRODUCT_MOBILE_ENTERPRISE" for Windows 10 Mobile Enterprise.
sensboston said:
How you guys enjoying upside-down camera in Skype app (after latest update)? :laugh:
Are you still waiting for "WP internals 2.2"? Are you necromancers (or necrophils)? :laugh:
So, trust me (to a man who has and used WP much earlier than you heard about it), WP/W10M platform is almost dead, and damn M$ do everything to kill it (even hardware isn't too outdated). Best we can do, is to sell these damn handsets on eBay (while they cost at least a few bucks). I predict, this summer you'll not be able to sell L-950/Xl even for a $50!
Will be glad to hear any real-life arguments about latest M$ "bugdate"... BTW, if you really enjoy upside-down camera in Skype - please do not reply...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is in ones perspective.
From a consumer standpoint the Devices dropped off and the OS is crawling along instead of running with the other builds like before. Unfortunately W10M is heading to a dead end. Fortunately for me it has no bearing either way. My phone calls still work, email, data, wifi etc. No need to move to something else, or declare my device obsolete. Ya Microsoft is not officially supporting W10M with no builds and features, but it is still supported with patches and such. For me to have a 4 year old device (in some cases) still running the latest and greatest Microsoft has to offer is fine by me. We all have different needs. If it aint working for you then it is fine to find what you need that does work. I personally really enjoy the basic functionality out of the box of the Lumias. Plus it is easy and cheap to find parts if something fixable on them breaks
From a developer standpoint, I bet this feels like a shot in the foot though from Microsoft in some ways. They basically drove off all their developers by not pushing out newer mobile devices or ways to make the Windows OS stick on phones. But maybe that was their plan since 2015...That is the way I see it anyway
nate0 said:
My phone calls still work, email, data, wifi etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But what do you do with a Skype, may I ask you? Do you do acrobatic stunts and meet other people via Skype on your head?
I believe, my 9 yo "dumb phone" from Motorola still can receive phone calls, emails etc. (but I never tried since 2010) if I'll find working and active "big" SIM-card. But this definitely not a point! My point is: Lumia 950 (handset costs me about $650 - via 2 years contract extension with AT&T) become unusable for most common tasks. I can't use Skype, I can't control quadcopter with it, I can't even unlock a bicycle from VBikes company! And can't do a lot of other things...
And, finally, I'm really tired from the usual L-950 customers "prayer": "But the camera is outstanding!" No, sir, nothing outstanding for the current times.