Why do people pay these people
They just make shit up and on the most gullible directors and media buy their bollocks.
Windows Phone won't ever amount to much, suggests analyst house IDC. The company's latest Worldwide Quarterly Mobile Phone tracker says Microsoft's mobile OS will grab 2.2 per cent market share in 2015 and by 2019 will have added a non-colossal 0.1 per cent more to claim 2.3 per cent of the mobile market. “Despite all the …
The article is four and a half years old, so I guess that, back then, they couldn't have predicted Microsoft's rape and murder of Nokia. I'd imagine that it didn't occur to the analysts that Microsoft would just throw away such a potential advantage.
This is less about the analysts being muppets (though some certainly are), and more about Microsoft insane decisions which have destroyed chances in the mobile market.
"This is less about the analysts being muppets"
Except a prediction that only works "barring unforeseen circumstances" is an utterly useless one - the whole point is unforeseen circumstances are guaranteed to arise in anything but the shortest of terms. Which, basically, implies exactly what has been suggested: the predictions are useless, and those making them are muppets unless they either manage to accurately foresee the unforeseen or admit they cant's actually predict s##t.
To be fair...
Yep, lots of analysts get it wrong, as do stock and weather forecasters (to name a few). They build a bunch of models that they think have a chance of playing out, and call the result based on the data they have available. Its better than saying "we have no fucking idea what the market will look like in a few years, and we cant be arsed trying to figure it out". If anyone is a muppet, it is people that believe the analysts have some kind of crystal ball. There is no news story here, but it does generate a lot of clicks...
"Except a prediction that only works "barring unforeseen circumstances" is an utterly useless one - the whole point is unforeseen circumstances are guaranteed to arise in anything but the shortest of terms."
Except that all you CAN do with a prediction. Unforeseen circumstances are just that: unforeseen. For example: who back in the early oughties could've predicted a device like an iPhone could create a genuine paradigm shift in the mobile phone market, forcing mobile companies (especially western ones) to realize feature phones would become a fading fad? It's like trying to plan for a trip (traffic and all) only to get caught in a sudden earthquake. Some things you just can't plan for because they're beyond million-to-one shots.
Yes, the Itanium forecasts were idiotic. IDC simply disregarded what mildly sane computer veterans have come to understand after all these years. It's not the hardware that sells. It's what you can do with the damned computer that really counts. In a (now modern) word, APPS.
HP backed Itanium as its hope of providing some continuity with its proprietary workstations and servers. Nope! Bad idea. Ditto, DEC Alpha, another proprietary wannabe, for the same reason.
On a side note, I am so sick of looking at articles like that and having to scan the page back and forth trying to find the sodding publication date. Any web site that publishes "news" articles should be forced to put the date in large friendly letters at the top of page. On pain of having its domain name revoked. With a rusty screwdriver. Slowly.
It is only by looking at the comments (1638 Days Ago) that I can figure it was probably published about four and a half years ago.
I should have been clearer in my rant. I was talking about the article that "Lost all faith..." was referring to:
not The Register's article. The PC World article most definitely does not have the date on the page (I'm on Windows 7 and Firefox 42.0) and unless a date sometime early in 2011 is cleverly encoded into the number 230151, it is not in the URL either.
El Reg articles, on the other hand, are a paragon of clarity and helpfulness. (That's enough grovelling - Ed)
The PC World article most definitely does not have the date on the page
It does transmit the date information to your browser - that article was published on 2011-06-12 (12th of June rather than the 6th of December, judging by other pages). But this seems only to be hidden in the headers.
I guess someone thought that all the site's readers scan it avidly every day, and no-one would ever come in from a search engine...
Well, apparently the true nature of the analyst whore business is not too clear? Here is how it works: You pay the analyst whore a lot of money and explain what the conclusion of the "study" should be. Then the analyst whore finds some numbers, statistics and trends that lead to the conclusion desired by the company paying the whore. It's that simple.
So in the referenced PC World article, MICROSOFT paid IDC for the report. In the most recent report, my educated guess would say that one of Apple, Google, Samsung, or Xaomi paid for the wonderful analysis culminating in the low Windows Phone market share.
And, of course, an IDC spokesperson will say that new information came to light between the two reports.
So i am a fan of Windows Phone (i have it, use it, like it, you may not and that is ok) but i'm really not sure that having Android (or any one system for that matter) with that much of the market is a good thing... it puts a lot of control in that company's hands - does anyone think that is a good idea?
You may not like MS (or Apple or Google for that matter) but surely choice is a good thing?
surely choice is a good thing?
Choice exists, but that doesn't mean people will take it and create diverse and roughly equal ecosystems and markets. So you have IoS, Android (and derivatives like Cyanogenmod), Windows, you have Blackberry, Ubuntu, Firefox. If you search hard enough you might find Tizen, Sailfish and a few others. But the reality is that most people perceive only a choice between Android and Apple.
One of the biggest killers of choice is "free" software. So Microsoft destroyed the browser market by bundling IE "free", with negative consequences still being felt thirty years later. The same vile company did the same thing with its mail client, and again the negative impacts (of lower choice and lower quality in the market) are still seen decades later. The ongoing cr@pness of Android with regard to updates and security is a result of the "free" nature of Android (who will bother to support something they aren't being paid to support?). Adobe Reader, Flash Player, both "free" and infamously cr@p.
At the root of the problem of "free" are three simple issues: 1) that new entrants are unable to create any revenue stream to give them traction thus crushing variety, 2) the lack of successful new entrants reduces pressure on incumbents to innovate and maintain, and 3) the lack of revenue streams from user-choosers reduces the incentive to keep the dominant "free" products secure and up to date.
Unfortunately "free" presses an evolutionary button in most of us, some sort of scavenger instinct that over-rides common sense, and makes us think that we are getting something for nothing. Not sure how you can undo that.
For the average buyer of a mobile phone, Android is not "free". It's not "free" for the phone manufacturer, either. It's certainly "cheap", for manufacturer and buyer, and for the manufacturer it's also customisable. Presumably those are its main advantages.
I agree that there's something wrong with the mobile phone market, but it has nothing to do with "free".
"I think that also explains why Linux (as a desktop OS) is such a steaming pile..."
That sounds like a wail for help from someone who has discovered this weird belly button thing now that MS has cut the umbilical cord.
Bravo for stating your mind plainly.
> One of the biggest killers of choice is "free" software. So Microsoft destroyed the browser market by bundling IE "free", with negative consequences still being felt thirty years later.
It was not that it was 'free', it was that it was bundled and compulsory. Spyglass wrote IE under a contract that paid them a few dollars for every copy sold. MS gave it away for 'free' and that destroyed Spyglass. One question is: does 'bundling' make it 'sold' as part of the product regardless of saying 'free' on the box?
When Win98 was installed the first reboot asked if you wanted to install IE but the 'Cancel' button was disabled. There was no escape, it had to be installed. Prior to IE, OEMs were installing Mozilla and Trumpet or similar. MS gave an additional discount (said to be $5) to _not_ install competitors.
So it wasn't 'free' that destroyed the browser market, it was 'compulsory' and 'OEM discounts'. MS also deliberately added non-standard features to FrontPage and IE so that Mozilla did not display 'properly'.
> Android with regard to updates and security is a result of the "free" nature of Android
There is a core of Android that is free, but if Google services are to be included then there is a charge. Google makes updates and new versions available to all, it is the makers that have to build and issue updates. Choose a vendor that does that.
> At the root of the problem of "free" are three simple issues: 1) that new entrants are unable to create any revenue stream to give them traction thus crushing variety, 2) the lack of successful new entrants reduces pressure on incumbents to innovate and maintain, and 3) the lack of revenue streams from user-choosers reduces the incentive to keep the dominant "free" products secure and up to date.
That is a very shallow analysis. Red Hat (as CentOS or several others) is free, Ubuntu is free, as are many others, yet they have entered the market and created a revenue stream, _and_ they keep the products secure and up to date.
Useful as competition is, you can't force users to accept 2nd rate products based on it. Yes competition would be nice but Microsoft don't have a competitive product and apple aren't even trying to compete for the mass market.
Time to look elsewhere, probably to internal competition in the Android market and that's likely to need a hefty nudge from regulators. Luckily it's now close enough to a monopoly to get that, but regulation still can't force users to say no to Google's desirable products, just open the door to alternatives on Android.
This argument is over, the world chose Android, that's where competition needs to work from now on.
Microsoft don't have a competitive product
With the amount of marketing that Microsoft perform, all they needed was a viable product.
Of course people have a choice. Most people aren't locked in to their phones like they where on the desktop... they've been able to chose what they think is the best based on their own criteria, not because they need to be compatible with the rest of the world; my phone can ring your phone, whatever OS it is running.
Of course people have a choice. Most people aren't locked in to their phones like they where on the desktop... they've been able to chose what they think is the best based on their own criteria, not because they need to be compatible with the rest of the world; my phone can ring your phone, whatever OS it is running
I humbly submit that this is not true: for many users, they feel that they ARE locked into their phones. The issue is not the phone per se but the personal data on that phone; Apple users must sync and back up their data using Apple applications, either iCloud or iTunes, and most Android users use Google cloud services. Once attached to these methods, getting your phone's personal data from one paradigm to the other is deemed, probably by a lot of people, to be a hassle to be avoided, so they stay in their chosen ecosystem.
For example: I, for one, use (the adware infected) MyPhoneExplorer to sync ny Android phones to my PC but, instead of using MPE's built-in database clients, I make MPE sync using Outlook. This grants me a standardized data store to do with as I please (and to keep Google the hell away from my data).. And how many people do this rather than simply using their Google account? Not many, compared to the hundreds of millions of Android users.
I have had to use my wife's iphone and brother's android phone at times. I'd rate both as being inferior in every regard (except the size (although perhaps not the quality) of the app store) to my Q10. However I suspect that lots of people here would disagree with me (I know a lot of people in my office do). One person's second rate is another’s productivity platform.
"Useful as competition is, you can't force users to accept 2nd rate products based on it."
I'd beg to differ - from my experience, most mobile users would choose a second rate free app over a similar app of better quality but that also carried a pricetag...
When Microsoft succeeds in a market they consolidate their success by eliminating choice. So yes, it is a good thing. Look at there all the innovation is in tech these days: where they aren't in control. There are thousands of different mobile device designs. Meanwhile on the shelf at Best Buy is still one choice of laptop OS and all the machines are bulky, low resolution, have four hours of battery life, might as well all be the same brand as if it was still 2005.
> When Microsoft succeeds in a market they consolidate their success by eliminating choice.
They've got successful products in the form of Office, SQL Server, Azure, XBox... does anyone see the utter lack of competition in productivity suites, databases, cloud services and games consoles?
No? Didn't think so.
Hmmm, yes but only if you look very hard, the average user won't look further than Microsoft, because they don't see anything out there. And lets face it when was there actually a significant and meaningful change in Office anyway, for the average user that is who uses it to type a few letters now and again.
I know there are other products out there, some good ones, it's my job to know, but the last time I suggested to a client they use something different, I was laughed at, even though I could show them a massive cost saving.
I'm beginning to see resistance to using any other cloud solution that Azure now, with some SIs preferring to resell MS, rather than host themselves, or use a cheaper alternative.
They've got successful products in the form of Office, SQL Server, Azure, XBox... does anyone see the utter lack of competition in productivity suites, databases, cloud services and games consoles?
True, but here's where I think this article is to be taken with a pinch of whichever condiment you prefer. If we look at all the products you mention, the dominance of Microsoft came at the cost of somebody else cocking up.
Office was an also-ran in the days of MS-DOS and only because the Perfect applications were such a pile of crap when taken to GUI did Office get a foothold. SQL Server only really gained its place because of the operating environment, the jury is still out on Azure and XBox would have been nothing without the disaster that was the PS3 release, not to mention the Wii U, especially when you consider the dominance of the PS2 and the Wii.
Microsoft have rarely ever produced anything that has succeeded in its own right, especially not in the face of competition from other companies and products, mostly because Microsoft have little original concept in them.
But for this reason you cannot completely write WinPho off. It will only take Apple or Google one slip and they could see themselves going the same way that Nokia did.
The only possible way that WinPho might go otherwise is if iOS and Android continue to dominate so that WinPho will eventually follow Zune into the pages of history, but the trick here is not to write history before it happens.
Actually, I think SQL Server became popular because the only thing worse than Microsoft licensing is Oracle licensing.
Actually I believe that Microsoft and Oracle took tips off each other when it came to licensing. Each has been a nightmare over the years at some point or other!
SQL wasn't a Microsoft product. They bought in Sybase.
They DID write GUI Word and GUI Excel -- Ironically first of all for Mac
Visio, Powerpoint bought in. Access was and is pointless.
MS DOS bought in
Win NT piggybacked on OS/2 and VMS with the Win 3.x shell (copied like Mac from Xerox).
CE was a cut down NT.
Like Google and Apple, there are very few successful from scratch MS products. Or much real innovation.
"Meanwhile on the shelf at Best Buy is still one choice of laptop OS and all the machines are bulky, low resolution, have four hours of battery life, might as well all be the same brand as if it was still 2005."
Well, yes. But that might be because you're going to Best Buy to get your kit, as opposed to somewhere that stocks decent laptops, which isn't exactly the keystone of every modern product launch. There's some incredible Windows laptops available if you go to an actual PC retailer as opposed to the same shop which sells junk DVDs for three quid a go.
@Naseus: "There's some incredible Windows laptops available if you go to an actual PC retailer as opposed to the same shop which sells junk DVDs for three quid a go."
PC's are commodity items, even the supposed 'actual PC retailers' are selling the same crap as Walmart, just charging more for it and offering a few different cosmetic options. And it's not really a problem for buyers because they get the job done, at the cost of further supporting the Windows monopoly. Just grabbing a new laptop of a supermarket shelf is the normal way to buy now.
After counting ordinary buyers, direct corporate bulk orders (for even lower spec Windows machines) and Apple feeding off the rich few %, the few of us actually dealing with specialist suppliers or caring about the spec or OS are just noise in the stats.
IE is still cack on it. Also many websites don't seem to test on it, so a lot of times you just get a blank page. Then there's the app gap, and more specifically midlevel apps like your local travel company, who will have an iOS and Android app, but never bother with WinPho. And it just errs too much on the 'walled garden' side for me in general. So back to Droid.
They have dropped IE on "it". Windows 10 Mobile only has Edge, no IE.
No problems with Apps that I need and use - my banks are there, as are the travel portals I use, for example. As is Audible, my most used app.
I've been through iOS and Android and have been using Windows Phone as my standard phone for several years now - I had a company Galaxy + private Lumia until recently, I dropped a bottle of water on the Galaxy and broke the display, I now have 2 SIMs in my Lumia 950.
As long as the choice is there, I will probably take Windows over the others, it is the least worst option.
"And it just errs too much on the 'walled garden' side for me..."
To the vast majority of Android users, Google Play is conceptually no different to the app store on Apple or Microsoft platforms. iOS apps won't run on Android or Windows. Android apps won't run on iOS, etc. If you switch to a different platform, you need to re-purchase most of your apps all over again. There is nothing special about Android in this regard.
You can argue about side-loading and "freedom" as much as you like, but Android remains a heavily controlled Linux distro running a proprietary Java-derived VM, all managed by a data-mining company whose customers are advertisers, and who's primary product is you. (Technically it's under "Alphabet" now, but Google are fooling nobody.)
If the GNU/FOSS communities wanted to support an open platform with actual freedom, rather than the illusions of both touted by Google, they've had multiple chances to do so. They failed.
Today's IT industry is such an unholy mess of unfit-for-purpose, insecure, amateurish, cobbled-together shite that it's practically impossible to use most of it safely *without* relying on sealed devices built around gated-community app ecosystems. And even that's still no guarantee.
If you want to know whose fault that is, here's a hint: if you still believe good design should be an optional extra, you're part of the problem, not the solution.
The continuum idea is only going to become more compelling as mobile device power increases. I don't see Android being a desktop replacement... Nor ios.
Certain things stop me from getting a windows phone now. Fix those and I would definitely consider it in the future.
I played with the new Lumia at a recent MS event. Plugged in the little Continuum box - worked really well. If I'm on a customer site giving a presentation, the notion of not needing to carry a laptop is very appealing - just plug in, connect to cloud VM and give the demo.
Downside at the moment is all the gotchas - why do I need to use any cables? Often a customer's projector will only have D-Sub. Even if I confirm all this in advance, on arrival it turns out they've not bothered to check.
For the time being, I'd still need to carry a laptop too.
Gets interesting in about 5 years, I just hope Windows phone still exists by then.
I don't see Android being a desktop replacement... Nor ios.
Why not? As implemented on a phone or tablet perhaps not, but Chrome OS is pretty good as a thin client with some offline capabilities. We've already heard that Google are quietly dragging Chrome and Android together. Apple can do the same thing if they choose.
Microsoft like the idea of a full fat WIndows + Office bloatware install on a phone because that supports what they want to sell, rather than because that's either what the market wants, or what is the best technical solution.
@Ledswinger it's not so long since ms liked the idea of a desktop dumbed down to act like a phone, which would have made it much easier for them running the same abbreviated apps everywhere. They're pushing full fat to phones only because that plan didn't work! I'll be sticking with the right os for each device for the foreseeable future, not whatcsuits the os writers plans.
"I don't see Android being a desktop replacement"
I did try with android-x86 on an old netbook (Acer Aspire One).
It was not bad as a simple desktop OS. It didn't have all the apps I would want, but I think it is worth trying the experiment to see whether it would work for the user's needs. If the needs are simple it could work for them.
If they're at all interested in gaining market share, they need to make Continuum work with Win32 exes. Either Win32 exes recompiled for ARM (Surface RT without the lockdown) or put out an Atom Surface Mobile. Anything else means they're not really bothered.
Oh, and make the mobile screen a big virtual keyboard while the phone is plugged into a big screen and there's no external keyboard connected by Bluetooth/USB.
Always was wondering why they did not ditch ARM altogether and went Intel all the way
Because Intel couldn't provide chips for the power envelope at the time. Now that they sort of can the Intel chips still cost more than ARM. Difficult to get / keep the OEM market going under those conditions – as Intel has repeatedly demonstrated – and that this the stated aim. The assemblies in Shenzhen et al. are built entirely around ARM SoCs.
From the article: "An aside: El Reg recently chatted with a Microsoftie who's been able to try the Project Continuum “use-your-Windows-Phone-as-a-PC” software, and declared it a generation shy of maturity and pleasant usability."
It's worth noting the rumoured "Surface Phone" project (currently hand-waved as being due sometime next year) is also expected to have an Intel CPU inside. I suspect it'll be, to all intents and purposes, the guts of a Surface 3 or the low-end Surface Pro 4 (i.e. using some variant of the "mX" CPU) in a smartphone. That will probably mean full-fat Windows in Continuum mode, with Modern apps only when in phone mode. (Legacy Win32 apps aren't going to be much use on a five or six inch display anyway.)
This is all hand-wavy woo and speculation on top of more hand-wavy speculation, but it does seem the most obvious path Microsoft could take.
"OS ? Are you having a larf?"
Obviously you havn't used it to make such a comment. You can now for instance upgrade a Xiaomi Mi4 from Android to Windows Mobile 10 - and it's then much faster - less laggy - and has better battery life. Not to mention is also far more secure with zero malware.
Yeah, it's ironic tbh. Most WP users are ferociously loyal because MS's appalling market position has made them genuinely work to create a decent bit of software that is actually better than the competition in most respects; it's more configurable than iOS and less disease-and-bloat-ridden than Android, it doesn't nanny you to the same extent as Apple do but it doesn't leave you alone in a field full of dog pooh and knives like Google's OS does.
I don't use it myself (I live in the field of dog pooh), but there's no real grounds to attack it in terms of performance or capabilities.
This article will make the fanboys over at Winbeta, WMPoweruser and Windows Central very, very sad.
Seriously though, the only reason why Windows phone still exists is because of Microsoft's mountain of cash and the almost religious obsession with setting up a 'third ecosystem'.
Microsoft's apps and services have already been ported to iOS and Android, there is absolutely no reason or rhyme to choose a Windows phone. Unless you prefer fewer and subpar apps, and those silly tiles.
The market has spoken, and I for one would not bat an eyelid if Microsoft were to stop producing Windows phones.
There are news that Nokia might be producing Android phones of its own in 2016 or 2017. Wouldn't it be poetic justice if they sell much better than whatever Windows phone that's churned out at that time?
"The market has spoken..."
This is the IT industry. History only shows us where we've been, not where we're going.
In 2007, Apple came out of nowhere and completely rewrote the book on smartphone design (particularly the UI). So much so, that the team behind Android had to go back to the drawing board. As did Nokia, BlackBerry, and everyone else. It still took them *years*. In BlackBerry's case, they were the kings of enterprise telephony at the time. Today? Not so much.
Microsoft have just launched a phone that does everything a smartphone needs to, including all the bells and whistles of 4K video, high-res camera, high-DPI OLED display, etc. But it also runs the same familiar Windows (10) OS as a Lenovo or Asus laptop... and can connect to a monitor, keyboard and mouse (wirelessly if necessary) to give you a desktop computer experience when you need it.
That last point might seem esoteric here in the West, but in India, it's not uncommon for a user's tablet or smartphone to be their *only* computer. In the developing world, ready access to a stable power supply can be hard to come by, let alone (wired) broadband Internet access, or even sufficient space for multiple computers. The moment Microsoft start including Intel CPUs in their smartphones, you'll be able to run the exact same enterprise apps on your smartphone as you are on your laptops and notebooks, and let's face it: few of those apps need an NVidia graphics card and a quad-core i7 CPU. This could be *huge* in developing markets.
Forget the glamourous design boutique products Apple produces: MS aren't playing that game any more.
> But it also runs the same familiar Windows (10) OS as a Lenovo or Asus laptop..
It may be that it has the same 'modern' UI, the one that Windows 8.x uses seem to dislike, but it does not run 'the same familiar' GUI that laptops run (ie the Windows 7 one).
> and can connect to a monitor, keyboard and mouse (wirelessly if necessary) to give you a desktop computer experience when you need it.
This only runs on two models so far - The 950 and 950XL. As these have ARM CPUs it is not really a 'desktop' experience, it is like RT but with fewer apps so far.
Microsoft confused users with Windows RT - Windows that could not run Windows programs. Now, by claimed that the 950 can give a 'desktop experience' they are continuing to perpetrate that same confusion. They also caused much confusion by announcing that Windows 10 would run on a Raspberry Pi. It just wasn't what most expected.
Ubuntu has had phones that can plug into monitor and keyboard/mouse and run desktop. It can run proper desktop applications, even on ARM.
"The market has spoken, and I for one would not bat an eyelid if Microsoft were to stop producing Windows phones."
Ironic that from my experience this phrase seems to come most often from Linux supporters... has "the market spoken" for desktop as well, or is this another knee-jerk "because it's Microsoft" thing...
I see a lot of Windows phones out an about now but they are mostly the cheap end of the market. I suspect people that struggle a bit with technology find the MS tiles easier than the little icons in Android.
But then MS doesn't care about these people very much it wants shiny fanboi money. Which it isn't going to get. If MS could get it into it's thick skull that people would chose their phones if they were a solid value for money option.Make it solid, put in a good battery, good camera make it reliable and at a good price. FK me that's a 640 funnily enough that's selling ok.
I've got a 920 I really like it. I really don't care about apps beyond a couple of photoapps. I don't think a lot of people really care too much about having every stupid app in the universe.
It'd be nice if MS would get round to straightening out the kinks rather than piling on more shiny.
In enterprise WinPho is less controllable than Android or iOS because MS are trying to keep it locked to their MDM. You're too late to the party open it up dipshits. There is no remote AD password reset, nice bit of mobility thinking there. everyone needs to come back to base every month to sit a PC and reset their password.
Every other night the phone decides it's a heater and burns through the battery, nothing in particular running.
No one is going to pay iPhone6 money for a 950.
I'm not sure if WinPhone will be around in the future. Which will be a shame. I really don't like Droid and I'm not buying into the Cupertino cult. BB is another one for the slab I think.
> But then MS doesn't care about these people very much it wants shiny fanboi money
I think they do want those people which is why they've churned out loads of cheap phones and one high-end phone in three years.
> No one is going to pay iPhone6 money for a 950.
Just as well it's significantly cheaper than an iPhone then.
Well an iPhone 6, the old model with 16GB storage and an 8MP camera is £459 at carphone warehouse in the UK,
There is no 32GB model but the 64GB model is £539.
It is a model over 1 year-old and has no wireless charging, a considerably less capable camera, a lesser screen, in theory at least, no removable battery (16GB remember) and no SD card expansion.
Whereas the 950 has all of those, more storage at 32GB, can be made 64GB for maybe £15 and costs £419 at CW.
So, without even comparing the iPhone 6S (£619, 4GB), which would be the only reasonable comparison, at least the camera has been improved somewhat, then the comparison you make is somewhat flawed. BTW, £619 is almost 50% more expensive than £419.
And, for me, having wireless charging especially is worth more money, not less. That is without promising things like Continuum and Cortana, which is not great, just better than Siri.
I have managed without SD cards and a removable battery before but they are still good things, just not killers for me.
And, as for apps, I use the premise that, if the outlet doesn't make the app for my OS, I don't care, I take my business to the one that does or do without - there is almost nothing that requires an app - in fact nothing if you include the fact that web pages invariably do a decent job.
I want, and have, a better camera, more storage, a nicer-to-use and not 70s looking OS, a slick interface, excellent backup and storage in the cloud, the best off-line mapping and navigation, free Office apps, superb actual telephony. Plus, even my old WinPhone (a 920) still gets updates and will get WP10. I can rely on support and I never, ever worry about attacks on the phone or consider installing an Antivirus app, there isn't one that isn't a scam anyway.
My phone works faster and better than it did when I got it.
As it happens, I read books and use tracking apps for exercise. I have found two perfectly usable, reliable and possibly superior apps to their main-OS equivalents. There is oodles of choice of others, such as Kindle, they are just not as good (as Freda in my case).
I tried Trip-it, not as good as Wipolo for me because it failed on some Spanish train tickets and Wipolo succeeded. They could improve their WinPhone app because they neglect it but it is good enough.
I have a good Dilbert App and an excellent xkcd app. I am still trying to think of an app I must have that would make me use Android or iOS but since I use both of those OSs in the work I am currently doing I despise them more and more. Android in particular is utter garbage. I tried and tried some Bluetooth thing only to discover that a pop-up telling me to pair was hidden, never popping up, later the same problem occurred with adding a device as a trusted device (hidden, no popup). When it all was connected the BT Low energy inexplicably failed to connect or disconnected and would not re-connect or worse "BLE has failed..." thank you, you utter piece of shit. At least the iOS device damn well connected although it too often disconnected but would fail to reconnect (much, much less bad though).
And, for those that care, they are both new devices (iOS 9.1 and a Moto something with recent Android).
And the interfaces, the Android is horrific, slidy pages are all well and adequate but another button to bring up a full list of stuff just plonked on a massive page. I have hundreds of apps, I would have to search every time, poor UX.
People appear to be app obsessed and can't see the bigger picture.
> A phone is more than just a "phone". That's the bigger picture.
Not really. In most cases, a phone is a phone, a camera, a browser, a mail client and an IM client. That's not actually much more than my poor old Motorola V3xx could do. Modern phones just do it on a nicer screen so that Facebook looks nice for the masses.
Not really. In most cases, a phone is a phone, a camera, a browser, a mail client and an IM client.
The number of downloads and purchases made in the App store and Google Play tell a different tale. So does the job market.
Plus, with Android especially, there's more to it than phones/tablets.
"I see a lot of Windows phones out an about now but they are mostly the cheap end of the market."
Our FTSE 100 recently deployed over 5000 Lumia 640s to replace Blackberry. They cost us about £100 each.
"But then MS doesn't care about these people very much it wants shiny fanboi money. "
I think Microsoft wants enterprise money as above rather more.
"In enterprise WinPho is less controllable than Android or iOS because MS are trying to keep it locked to their MDM."
Not true - the exact same APIs used by SCCM are also user by Airwatch, Blackberry, etc
"No one is going to pay iPhone6 money for a 950."
They are already for the XL at least - they are currently sold out in many places - It does after all have a somewhat better camera and display - which matters a lot to a significant number of people.
"There is no remote AD password reset"
Actually with Continuum there is. Also you can do it via Outlook Web Access.
"Every other night the phone decides it's a heater and burns through the battery, "
That's only an issue if you are using Windows Mobile 10 Beta. The RTM is out now and that's been fixed.
"is it? I haven't seen any information to that effect."
Now confirmed that is shipping on the Lumia 950. There is a now a minor bug fix update available to Windows Insiders, but the main build number stays the same - 10586 is the RTM.
>> The RTM is out now
>is it? I haven't seen any information to that effect
Straight question, downvote... Oh, I get it! A person with severe learning difficulties has noticed I said things about Android which were not complimentary and also true and so s/he is downvoting everything I say, even straightforward questions which actually draw doubt on the statement of somebody advocating WP!
You poor thing. I hope your carer gives you a lovely cuddle later.
If MS could get it into it's thick skull that people would chose their phones if they were a solid value for money option.Make it solid, put in a good battery, good camera make it reliable and at a good price. FK me that's a 640 funnily enough that's selling ok.
Are you telling us that 640 should be enough [phone] for anyone?
I counted and discovered I use about six regularly, including banking, satnav, silent circle phone, browser, protonmail, IM and a white noise generator that does actually help my little kids go to sleep (by saving me from going "shhhhh" for half an hour which gets pretty dull).
I currently have an Android phone (Blackphone 2) but would cheerfully go back to Windows because much as I love the Blackphone's security features and hardware, Android is a bag of shit.
So basically, fuck your apps. They are not a selling point when the OS is as unwieldy, unfriendly and insecure as Android.
That's true but horse before cart / chicken and egg etc. That said, more developers are now taking up the Bridge and seeing the benefits of a single OS across devices. Even with Android, devs have to tweak their apps for individual phone manufacturers (that's a lot more work than they'd have to put into Windowa 10 apps) and can't ensure their apps are always running om the latest versions of Android (because as we know, most phones wont update without carrier support which is lacking - probably a conspiracy to get you to by a new phone simply to upgrade to latest OS which is great for phone manufacturers but bad for consumers. There's also the huge issue of security on Android. Why MS doesn't emphasise these issues more to consumers and devs alike is a mystery, but they're good enough reasons for me to stay way from Android even with the app gap. Besides, I just live the features and interface of Windows 10 - can do so much more with it than either Android or iOS
Apple didn't invent the smart phone or MP3 but they did reinvent it and made them both successful. Being late to the party isn't always a bad thing. You can see how things can be improved and deliver something truly different, desirable and useful. To my mind that's Windows 10. It's no longer a case of mobile vs desktop / tablet... It's one and the same. With Surface phone, my prediction is that in a year or two, there will be no difference at all, other than screen size as mobile sized devices will run the full version of Windows in any event - probably why MS is reported to be stopping support for Windows 10 mobile in a few years time. Of course even that news is being reported as further evidence of Window's decline on mobiles but I see it as further evidence of the strength and attraction of Windows 10. Everyone else has a lot of catching up to do, which is great news for us fans of Microsoft's vision of the future ☺
Apple didn't invent the smart phone or MP3 but they did reinvent it and made them both successful.
Strictly speaking, Apple didn't reinvent anything. All they did was use their experience of re-marketing existing technology that they successfully used with the iMac on devices that existed but didn't have much of an impact at the time.
Actually, MP3 was already pretty big back then but devices to hold and play back the files were all over the place, not to mention that certain media companies weren't very happy about the existence of the format, not to mention the various facilities around back then that could be used to... gasp SHARE these files!
Apple got these markets because there were no other big companies out there to oppose them. That's the difference. And Microsoft aren't the only company with this problem. Anyone remember the Pippin?
It depends on the state of the party. When the iPhone came along, the mobile market was still maturing. Most people were on feature phones and at best 2nd-generation EDGE mobile data. There was plenty of room for growth, and Apple took advantage of it. Today, the mobile market is pretty much mature. Most anyone has a smartphone now and there is a tremendous variety of devices out there: so much in fact that the market is consolidating into a small number of major players (HTC, LG, Samsung, Sony) and a large bunch of knockoff players, with those in the middle like Asus on the way out. Microsoft tried to pull an Apple and pull another paradigm shift, but for the most part it fizzled and now it's the one who arrives to bare plates, an empty punch bowl, a dry keg, and the coolers containing noting but lukewarm water.
The problem with Microsoft is once again it doesn't sell its products well, yes WP lacks apps but if you compare an out of the box experience without installing 3rd party software WP kicks their arse.
As a phone its fantastic, but its not as customizable as android (or full of shit for that matter) and its not got the "image" of iPhones, and it lacks the apps compared to both.
But having used WP and WM since 2003 (with a brief fancy with android and ios) it is hands down the best PHONE, simple to use, very quick and even with its pre release status of WM10, pretty much trouble free with fantastic desktop integration. I want a phone that works, something I don't need to worry about and allows me to work the way I need to work. ios frustrated me and android was as buggy as hell unless you install custom ROMs but then you had to dance with the UI being made for looks rather than functionality. I want it to easily integrate in to the business networks and provide staff a trouble free experience the way I want them to have it delivered in a nice simple design.
It is absolutely right to criticise its flaws, but I really wish people would at least give it credit for the areas it excels at. I suspect those that cant identify these are people that haven't used it for any length of time or started out with a view to hate it in the first place, granted there are few people that do use it so I'm not expecting hundreds of folk on here to jump to its defence but the company I am working for is about to roll out WM10 devices across the estate as it ticks all the boxes we need it to so it does have its followers.
I'd been getting fed up with the bloatware on Android after having Samsung and Sony phones, and was pondering looking elsewhere. But then I got a cyanogenos phone, customisable yet simple version of Android. And it's great. I can't imagine why I'd look elsewhere now as long as it keeps this ethos.
There are no good UK OS offline mapping apps. Well, there wasn't 1 month ago the last time I looked. I really like all the MS Win Phones I've tried so far mainly in terms of battery life and build quality. Just get Memory Map or View Ranger on it and I'll switch as soon as my contract is up.
> a sector that didn't exist until MS created it.
Exactly what 'sector' do you think that is: A laptop replacement that can't be used on a lap ? A tablet that could be converted into a skateboard ?
There have been 'convertibles' well before Surface, tablet with stylus were years ago, MS did not create hi-res screens. Keyboard/covers had been done by Logitech and others.
I see what you did there.
> That is probably based on your dogma that iPad (with or without keyboard) cannot possibly be a productivity device.
Not at all, which is why (above) I referred to the iPad Pro as a "high end productivity device".
Do try to pay attention.
I love my Winphone. (635)
I'd love one that was a bit better, that had a front facing camera and a light, maybe a little bit bigger screen. Other little things like that.
But not a lot better, because I couldn't justify it.
However, I don't have that option.
The jump from bottom to top end was too wide. I wanted something in the middle for cost and function. And I couldn't get that. I don't worry much about missing "apps". I can't really think of anything that missing I really need.
In the Summer I will probably looking for a new phone. I'd love to stick with WinPhone. For a start it keeps my diary integrated with my PC and laptop ( through Outlook) in a way that Lightning+PaleMoon won't.
And yet I may have to go for an Android
..and data security!
If you want to keep your corporate and customer data secure, and you're going to let Smartphones access your corporate network, then Android is a complete non-starter. Even Knox (which is proprietary and locks you not only into one manufacturer but into a limited range of devices) is not in the same league of security as the the other three platforms.
So that leaves Apple (too expensive for what it is for many customers), Blackberry (likewise expensive and requires massive infrastructure) and Windows Phone. As long as Blackberry survives many existing Blackberry customers will remain locked into BES and Blackberry devices. If, however, the company goes belly-up (or gets closer to doing so) there could be a big corporate migration towards Windows Phone as being the cheaper secure alternative of those available.
Winpho does full encryption if you have it connected to an exchange server.
But MS just seem to make some stupid decisions about managing them. Lockout time - 30sec, 1min, 5min or 15min. No 10min option or even better how about we set the time?
Ok you can reset AD passwords with OWA. We're not permitted OWA.
It's frustrating it could be an excellent enterprise phone platform (we're still rolling them out despite the irritations) but MS almost seem hellbent on shooting themselves in the head.
Windows Phone does indeed do full encryption both in-transit and at rest, and you don't have to be connected to Exchange, although you do have to be using an MDM solution. Using the WP EDMP it is possible to force an always-on VPN connection, which the user cannot override.
What a load of tosh. And the funny thing is they cite Xiaomi's support of Android as being a factor to that success but seem oblivious to Xiaomi's support of Windows 10 (M4) or the release of Windows 10 ROM for Android, or the Bridge for porting iOS apps to Windows, or the upcoming Surface Phone, or Universal Apps, or Windows Hello, or Continuum, or Windows 10... The list goes on. What does Android offer, other than security issues (and the apps of course)?
For the record: I am a Windows Phone user (using WP 7.5, I have no intention to upgrade) and I actually enjoy the environment. Yes, I am a little bit biased but trust me when I say that I can easily set that aside. I'm a fan, not a fanboy.
I think that Windows Phone ("WP") has plenty of potential to gain a good share on the mobile market. There are plenty of advantages to think of. The simple, blocky, interface may seem a little off at first but once you start using it you'll soon come to appreciate it as well. Especially if you care more about functionality than looks.
But the problem is that Microsoft made a horrendous start, like they always seem to do. WP started out rock solid: hardware manufacturers had to comply to a very specific ruleset in order to call their product "Windows Phone". This gave us users the strong impression that you bought into something for the future, something with a longer time period. Just like Windows itself: I got Windows 7 around 2012 and I tend to use it around its EOL in 2018. That is 6 years worth of Windows 7.
SO we could easily live with the shortcomings of the first devices. It didn't have todo lists? Not to worry: future updates were bound to fix that.
Yeah, and around that time we also learned that Microsoft was ditching their WP7 line entirely and got ready to move onto WP8. Thanks for all the support dear users, now get ready to buy into Windows Phone again if you want to continue to enjoy the full experience.
That may work if you're Android or iPhone (interesting is to note that both environments don't do this: you can run modern version of the OS on older devices if you want to) but not if you're still desperately trying to gain extra market share. You need to attract customers, not piss them off.
Speaking of these other environments... User accessibility is also a big thing. I actually enjoy programming within Microsoft environments like .NET. I enjoy both C# as well as VB (mostly within VBA, but still...). So obviously I was thrilled at the opportunity to "hack" my phone. How can it get more geekier than hooking up your phone to your computer, firing up a free version of Visual Studio and try to get your phone to 'do' something?
I was honestly excited to learn about function calls within Windows which allowed me to control my phone. I really was. But I became horribly disappointed when I learned that the only way to dive into this new hobby of mine was to buy a developers license for E 100,- with Microsoft. That is a lot of money for something you're not even sure you want to dive into. Sure: I knew about the emulator. Did you miss my geek comment above? Anyone can play with an emulator. Where's the fun in that? Messing with my phone which I paid for, that is fun.
And as usual it wasn't until later when Microsoft realized their mistake and ended up providing free access to it. But as always: too little, too late. A lot of real fanatics, some really enthusiastic players, had already moved on. After my previously mentioned disappointment I uninstalled the WP SDK and never looked back. Sure, I know I can pick up the pase again if I wanted to. But the disappointment also made it loose its appeal. And another thing: Microsoft disappointed me once, what guarantees do I have that they won't do so again? Back then that was an issue: I could buy into WP8 and try again. But what guarantees were there that they wouldn't just drop the whole thing again as they have done before?
WP has plenty of potential. But the problem is that Microsoft doesn't know anything about appealing to its customers. They still think that they can dominate the market and that people will follow them no matter what. But times have changed... dramatically.
And until Microsoft changes that mindset then yeah... Then this will probably never come to pass.
Windows phone succeeded once... It was called version 7.5.
Then they started playing "me too" instead of staying on their own path. You can't out apple apple, and ya can't out Droid Droid... I used to love my windows phone, now I pray someone else matches the picture quality of my 1020 before it give up the ghost.
These projects are not worth the paper the they are printed on. Most seem to be from a drunken game of darts at the local watering hole with the "analyst" being well past blitzed. For all we know five years out the top smartphone OSes could be in order Android, Ubuntu, iOS, and FirefoxOS. Do I believe this will happen, no. There are too much time for any prediction to of much use extra that the smartphone will continue to mature with sales curve flattening out or even dropping some.
The irony being it's a far better experience than Android. Ivory tower executives who decided for Nokia not to go down the android route was a remarkable effort. However there's still time for Windows to develop as 10 will allow easier app development and it's the apps that are the only missing element of their mobile product. I own iPhone, android, Windows mobiles.
I guess it depends on your definition of success. If success is selling more phone this year than last year, they've been successful since before the iPhone first came into being. Microsoft is stable, they've never been one for leaps and bounds. They put in the work. They are gimmicky or gadget makers.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019