This has been my number 1 complaint with WinMo for years. There are several big issues MS need to take care of:
1) Updates need to be independent of the operator. I'm tired of seeing operator X get an update months before operator Y. This whole situation is what justifies xda-developers existence, and why there are so many people working on non sanctioned updates.
2) Updates mean 2 hours of work. When I install an update, I lose everything. It's a pathetic situation. I know there are some backup programs that can do a rom upgrade safe restore, but I've never found on that actually works perfectly.
3) Too many middle men. Despite complaining, I do understand the technical issues Microsoft is facing. They make an OS, a manufacturer makes the device for the OS, and an operator makes their own crap for on the device. That means as an end user I am 3 steps away from the source of what can fix my buggy device. In a perfect world things would work just like on my desktop. The OS is updated by Microsoft, device driver packages come from the manufacturer and the operator issues their own fixes. Each one should be independent.
Just to compare: on my Blackberry, I can do a full update in under an hour, which includes a FULL backup of the device. I click start, and 60 minutes later I have an updated device, with the same settings are prior to the update. It's close to perfection.
Now, now, to be perfectly fair, there are a few apps I have installed on my iPod Touch that wouldn't upgrade as elegantly as advertised. I ended up having to remove them from the iPod and iTunes, and re-download them in order to upgrade the programs. However, that was on the original 2.0 rom. I haven't been prompted yet to do any updates with 2.0.1.
We're talking about updating the OS, not individual applications. Actually, I'd say the upgrade experience on WM is a bit cleaner than it currently is on Apple's Touch platform.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Yuan Sheng
Really? Seriously? You guys want less carrier control?
Then stop whining every time when you see a phone's unlocked price is at US$400-500.
Except... Apple's devices are carrier subsidized, and yet they retain the rights to do upgrades. And I mean this everywhere, not just the US.
We're talking about updating the OS, not individual applications. Actually, I'd say the upgrade experience on WM is a bit cleaner than it currently is on Apple's Touch platform.
Except... Apple's devices are carrier subsidized, and yet they retain the rights to do upgrades. And I mean this everywhere, not just the US.
--janak
I bought my IPhone 3G in Italy, SIM Free, and paid it around $700, same amount I paid my SIM Free HTC Diamond.
Carriers are, sorry already have, killed the market here in the US!
Here I have to pay to receive a SMS! Are we kidding?! Compare costs and available speed of DSL connections here in the US and the rest of the world and you will see how deep we have already sunk.
And while we are here add the worst scandal of all: the TV Cable companies oligopoly.
Btw Jason I could not agree with you more; nowadays MS seems to be in a complete disarray.
Carriers are, sorry already have, killed the market here in the US!
Oh, I'm not trying to defend the carriers. I'm just focusing on the upgrade experience.
(And, to be precise, I'm not saying that Apple's upgrade deal with the carriers is "usual" -- but they managed to pull it off, and I'd like to see if Microsoft try the same, if only for the parts that aren't the radio stack.)
Desktop/Server Windows' HAL is a very broad brush at the very lowest level. Most PCs will run exactly the same HAL. What makes the OS adaptable to the hardware is drivers.
The Windows CE equivalent of the HAL is the OAL, OEM Adaptation Layer. It's sometimes also called a Board Support Package (BSP) - a number of BSPs for stock boards are available. OEMs rarely use these development boards directly, though, so the BSP will need to be adapted to the device.
To save space, some components - such as graphics and keyboard drivers - are compiled directly into their hosts, since the graphics chip is obviously not replaceable on a PDA. It could be done as a loadable module but, in practice, usually isn't. Also, the exact way in which the devices are wired up may not be identical between PDAs with the same chip, and that can have an effect on the system (example: a graphics chip might not appear at the same physical address on two different systems). There's no master plug-and-play system on handhelds - only PCMCIA and SD cards support plug-and-play. Everything else has to be set up correctly at ROM build time.
The problem for driver upgrades is that Microsoft haven't focused that closely on keeping the driver model identical between major versions. This allows the model to be changed more readily to accommodate new features, at the cost of drivers needing to be rewritten at least in part to match the new model. It's not as simple as just reusing the same binary on the new device.
AKU updates - minor versions of an OS, where the driver model doesn't change - are relatively easier, but the OEM may still decide that they need to revalidate the device completely, and the networks or regulatory authorities may require it.
We're currently trying to get an OEM to replace the version of .NET Compact Framework in ROM on an enterprise device with version 2.0 SP2, with the unmanaged DLLs set to Execute In Place, in order to recover 1.1MB of virtual address space. To do this they have to get MS to sign the update package. Unfortunately their first pass only saved 300kB because they got the base addresses wrong, and mscoree2_0.dll (870kB) ended up located at the top of memory, rather than in the 'hole' where the previous version lived.
I must say, I haven't posted much on these sites for a couple years, but have been an avid reader, watching the news and keeping up-to-date on all things Windows Mobile.
When I saw Jason's article/post I said to myself, "right on Jason!"
I have been using Pocket PCs since the old Philips Nino days, when we were using WinCE devices, and frankly have believed in the MSFT products and partnerships for years. Lately, however, I'm growing tired of the fact that we constantly get locked in this MSFT/Carrier/Manufacturer blame game, and consumers suffer.
My latest Pocket PC, the Verizon XV6800 is a fabulous device that has a few "bugs" that could certainly be worked out by HTC, Verizon, MSFT, if they really cared to do it. But, as others have said, we're still waiting for upgrades (where's the promised EVDO rev A upgrade?) Where's a WM 6.1 upgrade? When WM7 reveals itself, will it be available to me? Why can't I get Windows Live Messenger direct from Verizon or MSFT?
Meanwhile, I have a small but growing faction of friends that can't stop raving about the iPhone. Frankly, the more I see, the less I can do to defend Windows Mobile. At this point my reasons for staying with Windows Mobile has more to do with Verizon than Microsoft! (What a switch) I absolutely believe in Verizon's wireless service (not to be confused with their customer service) and just can't switch to AT&T. If Verizon had the iPhone, I probably would switch.
Kudos to Jason for really highlighting the problems with the WM Ecosystem. I hope executives at MSFT really heed his comments and those of others in this chain. MSFT needs to either build their own phone, or forge partnerships where WM devices have a defined lifecycle of at least 1 major upgrade (say WM 5 to 6) and regular point upgrades (6.0 to 6.1 as an example.) I don't expect carriers to keep my 5 year old device running, but we should expect that during the average 2 year contract, the phone will be kept updated and relevant. MSFT and the carriers can surely figure out a way to do it. (Hint to MSFT: push for this arrangement with one carrier, and help them market the concept, and you'll soon have all the carriers wanting to do it!)
Whether the upgrade situation is resolved through a HAL or a bunch of programmers in a remote section of India figuring out new drivers, I don't really care, but I have the full confidence of MSFT and their partners that they can make a change if they believe it is important.
And from one loyal WM user, trust me, it's important. The iPhone is becoming a serious contender and it won't take much more to make me jump the MSFT ship. (Especially since you licensed ActiveSync technology to Apple!!!)
Jason: Keep up the good fight! Keep spreading the message that a large group of WM users feels every day.
Really? Seriously? You guys want less carrier control?
Then stop whining every time when you see a phone's unlocked price is at US$400-500.
If you cannot except the carrier rebates you'll never escape their control.
Dude - what we're talking about here is the fact that the phone's OS has been customized by the carrier to the point that upgrades are difficult to roll out.
Besides, if you get an 8GB iPhone from AT&T, it only costs you $199, and it has no AT&T customizations on it that prevent you from receiving OS updates from Apple. Sure - you can't stick a T-mo SIM in the thing and expect it to work, but the fact remains OS upgrades are available and supported (we've already seen one come out for the new 3G iPhones this week)
A Q9 Global from AT&T has not had a single update since it came out (LAST YEAR!). Same price range, but heavy customizations that keep us from getting updates.
If you compare the frequent iPhone updates that come from Apple, all of which can be applied to AT&T iPhones, to the one or two official updates that came from AT&T for the 2125, 3125, 8125, 8525, BlackJack, Treo 750w, etc., I think you'll see the pattern. Carrier logo updates, like the first update for the BlackJack where they simply changed Cingular logos and such AT&T equivalents, don't count as they didn't change the OS version or provide any bug fixes.
$199 Subsidized AT&T iPhone - No AT&T customizations that stop you from getting all updates FROM APPLE
$199 Subsidized AT&T Tilt - Heavily AT&T customized, and only one update FROM AT&T since it came out in October 2007
On the other hand, you didn't say much about the mobile operators, and I think they absolutely must share a good chunk of the blame.
If you do a search on my article for the word "network" you'll see I mentioned the mobile operators four times - I absolutely understand in the current system they are responsible for 90% of the problems with updates.
__________________ Want to contact me personally? Use this. Want to read my personal blog? Check it out. Want to follow me on Twitter? Here you go.
IIRC @ WPC Andy Lees clearly said that in the future version of WM (he didn't obviously name it WM7) updates will be directly provided to the user by MS and not the network providers anymore (just like the iPhone)
That's good to hear, but I've seen many empty promises come from Microsoft over the years, and I'm not apt to believe that until I see it happening. I really hope it does though!
__________________ Want to contact me personally? Use this. Want to read my personal blog? Check it out. Want to follow me on Twitter? Here you go.
So far I get the feeling most of you want to have your cake and eat it too.
Thing is, does anyone honestly think a Tilt is going to outsell the iPhone? Also, doesn't the iPhone come with an expensive 3G plan?
There is no such thing as a free lunch. The subsidies are only possible because of complex array of business models, from installing crap to entice you to use certain (highly marked-up) services, advertising/branding, expensive plans, or in the iPhone's case, the knowledge that it will sell and generate new customers (on lucrative data plans no less).
There's a reason why Apple can get to dictate this. They know they have a product they can sell. The carriers know this too.
On MS:
I think one problem MS has is that there's a OEM in the middle of it all too. If they're used to dealing with the carriers in one way, MS has less choice in this matter. Probably a reason why they bought Danger. Having both the hardware and software could make the difference on the negotiation table.
__________________
Baka. Soku. Zan. - The justice behind the dysORDer.
I ended up having to remove them from the iPod and iTunes, and re-download them in order to upgrade the programs. However, that was on the original 2.0 rom. I haven't been prompted yet to do any updates with 2.0.1.
Linear Mode
LinkBacks (?)
