Is Windows Phone 7 Update Going To Be Different?

[Nurhisham Hussein]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/cutting-through-the-fud-about-windows-phone-updates/2596' target='_blank'>http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/cutt...ne-updates/2596</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"Microsoft is in the driver's seat. They own the servers. They control the updates. But they also recognize they have partnership relationships to sustain, and they can't just push an update out that might affect a carrier's network. That would be stupid and short-sighted. Do you think Apple delivers an update to the iOS platform without making sure that their carrier partners have had a chance to test it for issues?..That's where the paranoia creeps in. And that question of the business model is what my friends Peter and Paul (and Adrian too) are missing."</em></p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/wpt/auto/1289520847.usr14226.jpg" style="border: 0px solid #d2d2bb;" /></p><p>Ed Bott takes aim at the critics - and he's not pulling his punches! There's a lot of angst over Windows Phone 7's update model - and understandably so given the slow and haphazard experiences that Windows Mobile owners were subjected to. Ed thinks Microsoft's approach is closer to the what Apple has done with the iPhone, but others think it's not much different from the way it used to be. What do you guys think? Sound off in the comments!</p>

[benjimen]

I don't think it'll be like it was with WM, neither will it be anything like iPhone updates. It sounds exactly like Android. Devices will receive updates for a year or so, none of them as timely as the users wish -- after that, you're out of luck :(

[BobbyCannon]

I don't think it'll be like it was with WM, neither will it be anything like iPhone updates. It sounds exactly like Android. Devices will receive updates for a year or so, none of them as timely as the users wish -- after that, you're out of luck :(

Can't happen. Microsoft has already stated that the carrier can only hold out for one update. When a new update is available Microsoft WILL push out up to the previous update no matter what carriers say. It's up to the carrier to test then tell Microsoft that the latest update is ready for their network.

I think with this mindset it going to require the carriers to be on the ball because whether they like it or not the update will go out so they better be ready.

The only part I don't like is the fact that they can hold out on the latest version.

[stlbud]

Microsoft has done a lot of back pedaling on this issue. At first they said they were in control and would push updates out whenever they wanted.

These phones are not as equal as has been stated. The camera, for instance, is set by the manufacturer and they will be the ones issuing updates to the imaging software. So even if Microsoft wants to do something about imaging, they will have to wait. Other issues include slide out keyboards, Dolby speakers, etc. each of which is beyond Microsoft control.

I'm not as optimistic as some and am going to wait and see. I've been using Windows (CE, Mobile, etc.) since version 2.11. I've loved it all along until my last 2 devices. The experience with WM5 and WM6.1 has been miserable with many problems from reliability to features that don't work for various reasons.

[Fritzly]

Can't happen. Microsoft has already stated that the carrier can only hold out for one update. When a new update is available Microsoft WILL push out up to the previous update no matter what carriers say. It's up to the carrier to test then tell Microsoft that the latest update is ready for their network.

I think with this mindset it going to require the carriers to be on the ball because whether they like it or not the update will go out so they better be ready.

The only part I don't like is the fact that they can hold out on the latest version.

Not exactly: what MS stated is that a non released update will be incorporated in the next one but nothing about the fact that release the latter will be mandatory for the carriers.

There is a lot of uncertainty about how the entire process will be handled and when you launching a new product the last thing you want is uncertainty. MS should states in a very clear way, not this kind of Washingtonian comments, how things will work. it is clearly in its best interest but..... are they in the position to do it?

The sooner they will do the better! It seems they have some momentum now and they should not let it go; the competition is not sleeping:

Exclusive: Samsung 'flagship' phone with Gingerbread and huge display coming in early 2011 (update) -- Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/11/exclusive-samsung-flagship-phone-with-gingerbread-and-huge-di/)

Personally I never used an Android device but this, if it will be confirmed, is tempting....

[benjimen]

Can't happen. Microsoft has already stated... [BLAH BLAH BLAH]

Yeah, right...

[randalllewis]

Devices will receive updates for a year or so, none of them as timely as the users wish -- after that, you're out of luck :(

And your conclusion is based on what? I going out on a limb here and guessing that Ed Bott's got a firmer understanding of the situation. Microsoft's description of what will happen is acutally quite clear. Unfortunately, some folks are seeking yes and no answers to a series of hypothetical questions that can't be answered that way.

Microsoft's history with software or firmware updates of its products is quite good: Windows, Zune players, Xbox, etc. Windows Mobile was the exception and that was because of several factors, but comes down in the end to the fact that no one party was ultimately responsible. With WP7, that is no longer true.

[Fritzly]

And your conclusion is based on what? I going out on a limb here and guessing that Ed Bott's got a firmer understanding of the situation. Microsoft's description of what will happen is acutally quite clear. Unfortunately, some folks are seeking yes and no answers to a series of hypothetical questions that can't be answered that way.

Microsoft's history with software or firmware updates of its products is quite good: Windows, Zune players, Xbox, etc. Windows Mobile was the exception and that was because of several factors, but comes down in the end to the fact that no one party was ultimately responsible. With WP7, that is no longer true.

Same question could be asked about your statement; Ed Bott made his opinion based on MS comments about the issue; other people:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/update-has-microsoft-put-windows-phone-7-updates-in-the-hands-of-the-carriers/10314

elaborated a different opinion.

As far as I am concern both opinions are valid and, at the same time, opinable; time will tell who is right.

[randalllewis]

Same question could be asked about your statement; Ed Bott made his opinion based on MS comments about the issue; other people:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/update-has-microsoft-put-windows-phone-7-updates-in-the-hands-of-the-carriers/10314

elaborated a different opinion.

As far as I am concern both opinions are valid and, at the same time, opinable; time will tell who is right.


I'm sorry but that is a false equivalency. Bott and Hughes may both have blogs on ZD Net, but that doesn't make their commentary equal. And besides, that wasn't my point. I commented on somone unsubstantiated prediction that Microsoft would issue updates in a non-timely manner and only for a year before abandoning its users. My point, based on Microsoft's past practices, was that was highly unlikely.

[benjimen]

And your conclusion is based on what?... [BLAH BLAH BLAH]


This isn't a debate -- readers were asked what they thought would happen, feel free to post what you think might happen, otherwise, stfu ;)

[randalllewis]

This isn't a debate -- readers were asked what they thought would happen, feel free to post what you think might happen, otherwise, stfu ;)


I did. And also asked --politely-- what yours was based on.

[MadSci]

Frankly, the reason that OS Updates have been such a sore point for WM is not really the fragmented platform - that is a contributing factor yes, but the REAL isssue is that MSoft has continued to release half-baked OS versions in the first place.

This appears to be baked into MSoft's corporate culture. Anyone remember how Win Do's! Me and Vista were excreted upon an amnesiac public? WMob 6.0 was atrocious, WM6.1 better but it's only now at WM6.5.3 that I am actually enjoying using my phone. And I don't owe any thanks to my Carrier (AT&T), since they don't sell or support my phone as it's such an iPhone-killer they were afraid to put it in front of their Customers. I imported my HD2 from Oz, then flashed an NRG ROM on it and frankly there's nothing out there that comes even close to it. Thanks MSoft! Thanks AT&T!

Let's face it, if you want a feature that's NOT on your phone when you buy it - then DON'T BUY IT! (Please see The Four Rules below)

None of the steps that have brought me so close to phone Nirvana have been offered to me by any of the official players, it's the WM Community that make this platform really work.

So, the question is, will MSoft stop releasing crappy half-thought through OS', so that the speed of updates is not such a flashpoint? Frankly, everything we know points in the other direction, with MSoft already touting the value of their upcoming update to WM7 this spring as bringing the platform a basic functionality that we have enjoyed since WM2003 (yes, I'm winging about cut/paste - 'cause I use my phone for Business and this is a fundamental and essential tool!). So the update issue is only so important because MSoft hasn't changed its business model of touting non-functional software!

Frnakly, I don't care. WM7 = FAIL, it's as simple as that. Sure, maybe in 2013 or 14 MSoft will finally get a fully functional OS that will attract me, but at this point, I'd be a fool to hop over to WM7 trusting that MSoft has 'changed it's business model' and so I can expect them to patch their OS fast enough for it to be tolerable. See Rule #1!

Always Remember the Four Rules! :p

MadSci

The 4 Rules
1. Don't buy ANY cellular product on the basis of what "will" be coming to you. If you value it, wait until it is put into your hand.
2. Don't invest any time in loading up your new Smartphone/PDA with programs and data until AFTER you have verified every single feature you have been told will be on the phone, and every thing you 'heard' will be on the phone.
3. Return it IMMEDIATELY upon discovering something from "2." above is missing/non-functional.
4. Don't belive ANYTHING a salesperson tells you. The level of ignorance, misunderstanding and misinformation they absorb and then spew back at you is amazing, and they suffer no penalties for selling you a phone that doesn't work as advertised.
And remember that most of the individuals involved with you are not trying to make you an unhappy customer, it's just the nature of the system, so protect yourself.

[Twain]

I totally agree with MadSci on his post.

But first, on the original topic question about what Microsoft will do, I won't speculate -- instead I'll wait and see what they actually do. I am not expecting much.

In terms of the MadSci post, I am in agreement with his "four rules", however, I would caution an implementation of Rule 3 in which you return the phone if it doesn't have everything you thought was going to be on it. What is tricky is that it is very difficult to determine what new phones are supposed to have. Per Rule 4, the salespeople won't know and you really can't go by hearsay. That's why possibly the best approach is to wait for the phone reviews on your favorite websites (note the plural) where phones for a specific network are reviewed.

Barring that, you are setting yourself up for disappointment if you rely on anything else. I'm not sure it's fair to return something on the basis of what you thought you were "promised".

My bottom line: I will patiently wait for Verizon to come up with Windows 7 Phones and then I'll wait for the reviews to separate fact from fiction. By the time Verizon releases phones, the update model should have been exercised once.