[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

Windows Mobile touch screen devices are so much more convoluted then they need to be. Microsoft did the right thing when they created the Standard platform and created a device that was usable with one hand. The same cannot be said for the Professional version. The Professional version is riddled with things like tiny "OK", a Start menu, and other aspects of a Desktop computer which are jammed into a device with a 3.5in screen at most. It just doesn't work and needs to be redesigned from the ground up, user interface wise, to make it more user friendly.

First, a Start menu and OK button are not convoluted. They may not be finger-friendly, but they work easily enough and are almost instantly familiar to most Windows users.

Second, the biggest criticism I've heard of the Windows Mobile user interface (other than it not being finger-friendly) is that things are buried too deep in menus. That's even more true in WM Standard, where you only have two softkeys and no menu bar or tool bar like you can have on WM Classic/Professional.

Third, the Start menu is a great feature in WM Professional, allowing you to quickly switch applications and start your favorite ones. It's not much more difficult in WM Standard, but you have to go to the Home screen to switch or start applications. Read Why We Love the Windows Mobile Start Menu for more discussion on this.

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

With the way Google is churning out updates I wouldn't expect to see the excitement wearing off anytime soon. The T-Mobile G1 has only been out for a few months and in January Google has plans to release an exciting new ROM which is part of their "Cupcake" branch. The new ROM includes things such as an on-screen keyboard and other features users are craving such as Stereo Bluetooth, video recording, updated and faster web browser and a lot more.

Those are nice updates, but I'd expect a bunch of updates on the first release of an OS. When the OS is 5-10 years old, how often do you think updates will be coming?

Also, OS updates/upgrades aren't the only way to generate excitement in a platform. New hardware can do it -- remember the excitement about the Motorola Q; the HTC Touch Diamond, Pro and HD; the Samsung Omnia; the Sony X1; etc.? New software can do it -- how much excitement was generated by the iPhone's App Store?

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

The feature set coming out in the Cupcake update is amazing for only a few months time work. Granted the above features have been a part of Windows Mobile for years, but how long did it take Microsoft to get around to putting those features in? Also when Microsoft did add those features, were you able to get an official ROM from your carrier and update your device while still keeping your data... or even update your device with an official ROM at all without buying a new device?! Better yet has Microsoft ever been known to release such a major update to their mobile operating system less than 6 months from the release of the previous OS?

Your questions are fair, but irrelevant to my point which addressed your original comment -- "Unfortunately Windows Mobile hasn't changed at all since I started using it on my Motorola MPx220 way back in the day." Are you still claiming that statement was true in spite of the features I presented to the contrary, or are you backpedaling and deflecting with another argument?

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

It is not that those update didn't matter it is more of the fact that those updates were just band-aids on a much larger problem. One of the largest problems being how long it takes for any major updates to come out of Redmond. How long have we been hearing about Windows Mobile 7 or "Photon"? It has been years and we still have over a year to go.

Yes, Photon was being talked about before WM 6 was released, but see my previous comment. I'm not saying Microsoft doesn't need to speed up their innovation; I'm disputing your claim that there hasn't been any at all in 4 years.

Also, remember that Microsoft has a higher burden here. They have to support multiple devices across many carriers. Apple has to support three devices (including the iPod Touch) across fewer (I think) carriers. Google (right now) has to support one device on one carrier (although I'm sure that will grow).

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

These are all serious questions that I feel Microsoft ignores that need to be addressed if Microsoft wants to continue to compete in this arena.

I agree with you on that. I just don't like the facts being distorted.

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

Windows Mobile touch screen devices are so much more convoluted then they need to be. Microsoft did the right thing when they created the Standard platform and created a device that was usable with one hand. The same cannot be said for the Professional version. The Professional version is riddled with things like tiny "OK", a Start menu, and other aspects of a Desktop computer which are jammed into a device with a 3.5in screen at most. It just doesn't work and needs to be redesigned from the ground up, user interface wise, to make it more user friendly.

First, a Start menu and OK button are not convoluted. They may not be finger-friendly, but they work easily enough and are almost instantly familiar to most Windows users.

Second, the biggest criticism I've heard of the Windows Mobile user interface (other than it not being finger-friendly) is that things are buried too deep in menus. That's even more true in WM Standard, where you only have two softkeys and no menu bar or tool bar like you can have on WM Classic/Professional.

Third, the Start menu is a great feature in WM Professional, allowing you to quickly switch applications and start your favorite ones. It's not much more difficult in WM Standard, but you have to go to the Home screen to switch or start applications. Read Why We Love the Windows Mobile Start Menu for more discussion on this.

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

With the way Google is churning out updates I wouldn't expect to see the excitement wearing off anytime soon. The T-Mobile G1 has only been out for a few months and in January Google has plans to release an exciting new ROM which is part of their "Cupcake" branch. The new ROM includes things such as an on-screen keyboard and other features users are craving such as Stereo Bluetooth, video recording, updated and faster web browser and a lot more.

Those are nice updates, but I'd expect a bunch of updates on the first release of an OS. When the OS is 5-10 years old, how often do you think updates will be coming?

Also, OS updates/upgrades aren't the only way to generate excitement in a platform. New hardware can do it -- remember the excitement about the Motorola Q; the HTC Touch Diamond, Pro and HD; the Samsung Omnia; the Sony X1; etc.? New software can do it -- how much excitement was generated by the iPhone's App Store?

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

The feature set coming out in the Cupcake update is amazing for only a few months time work. Granted the above features have been a part of Windows Mobile for years, but how long did it take Microsoft to get around to putting those features in? Also when Microsoft did add those features, were you able to get an official ROM from your carrier and update your device while still keeping your data... or even update your device with an official ROM at all without buying a new device?! Better yet has Microsoft ever been known to release such a major update to their mobile operating system less than 6 months from the release of the previous OS?

Your questions are fair, but irrelevant to my point which addressed your original comment -- "Unfortunately Windows Mobile hasn't changed at all since I started using it on my Motorola MPx220 way back in the day." Are you still claiming that statement was true in spite of the features I presented to the contrary, or are you backpedaling and deflecting with another argument?

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

It is not that those update didn't matter it is more of the fact that those updates were just band-aids on a much larger problem. One of the largest problems being how long it takes for any major updates to come out of Redmond. How long have we been hearing about Windows Mobile 7 or "Photon"? It has been years and we still have over a year to go.

Yes, Photon was being talked about before WM 6 was released, but see my previous comment. I'm not saying Microsoft doesn't need to speed up their innovation; I'm disputing your claim that there hasn't been any at all in 4 years.

Also, remember that Microsoft has a higher burden here. They have to support multiple devices across many carriers. Apple has to support three devices (including the iPod Touch) across fewer (I think) carriers. Google (right now) has to support one device on one carrier (although I'm sure that will grow).

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

These are all serious questions that I feel Microsoft ignores that need to be addressed if Microsoft wants to continue to compete in this arena.

I agree with you on that. I just don't like the facts being distorted.

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

The argument can be made that if you have to "get used to it" then it doesn't really work at all.

I hope you weren't even close to serious with that comment. Driving a car is something that takes a lot of getting used to, but it works.

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

The only reason I kept my Android device and didn't move back to a Windows Mobile device right away was because the user interface just plain worked and I didn't have to get use to anything. Everything in the user interface worked the way I would have expected it to work and was incredibly intuitive.

Is that really the only reason? If so, will you move back if Microsoft provides a better UI?

Also, does Android work the way you expected because you knew what to expect thanks to your experience with other smart phones? In other words, if you were completely new to smart phones, do you think Android would be as easy to learn?

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

You're right, average users don't care about upgrading their handsets which is why companies such as Google and Apple are pushing the updates out to their users so they will have the latest ROMs on their devices. This is something we have been wishing Microsoft would do for years. There is no reason why we should have to track down "cooked" versions of ROMs to get the latest software on our devices with the latest bug fixes and god fordib security fixes.

Agreed, but is that Microsoft's fault or the carrier's? Remember that Microsoft doesn't deal directly with the carrier (as far as I know), so updates have to be approved by the OEM and carrier. Apple negotiated around that, but how does it work with HTC and T-Mobile? Does Google actually push the updates directly to users or does HTC do it? And will the Top 3 carriers allow that?

I agree that Microsoft needs to deliver updates directly, but I think they bowed to carrier demands in the past. Maybe if the carriers are lightening up thanks to the iPhone (and maybe Android), Microsoft will be able to do that, too.

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

The average user and the power user should never have to worry about upgrading our devices just like we should never have to worry about manually downloading and installing updates on our Desktop computers.

But some of us do worry about upgrading desktops. I don't allow automatic updates on Windows; I want to see what I'm getting. Corporate IT departments also worry about automatic updates, often turning that off on user machines and pushing the updates themselves. Even iPhone and Android users have to OK an update, don't they? So they do have to worry (meaning get interrupted) about them a little.

I do agree that a hard reset shouldn't be the default, of course; that's just horrible. Just remember that when Windows CE was created, the Internet hadn't really taken off yet and there were no converged PDA phones, so it's understandable that automatic over-the-air updates weren't standard.

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

Android started innovating when they released an open source mobile operating system that allowed anyone to download the source code and poke around in it and put that OS on any device you can get it on to. You already have crafty people porting Android over to the Nokia Internet tablet series of devices and even the Sprint HTC Touch.

Sorry, but open source isn't an innovation. Even in the phone world, I believe there were open source Linux phone OSes before (like LiMo). Android might have been the first complete open source phone platform, but that's a minor innovation, I think.

As for putting Android on other devices, that's also nothing new. I remember people putting Linux on an iPAQ 3600 series PDA back in 2001 or so.

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

I'm completely positive that everyone who has ever performed an update on a Windows Mobile device, power user or not, has cared that once that update was completed they had to reinstall all of their programs, files, sync settings, etc.

Yes, that's true. But I think Damion's point was that the number wasn't that big; most people don't upgrade their OS. Given the pain that WM created, though, that's not surprising. I think if the process is easier, more people will do it.

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

The way Microsoft currently handles updates is stupid and cannot be defended.

Of course it can be defended because it worked that way for years. It's definitely time for a change, though.

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

If you're going to wipe someones device, at least give them the software to back up their ActiveSync settings, a list of installed programs, images, videos, and paid for and downloaded ringtones which users are never happy about when they lose since those ringtones cost $2USD a pop.

Microsoft did that. Remember that ActiveSync did handle much of the work for you. Applications were easy to reinstall using Add/Remove Programs (I don't know if Windows Mobile Device Center has that feature) and files in your \My Documents folder and all of your PIM data could easily be synced again. Yes, you'd have to apply your program's settings again and any tweaks, but I've heard that many users installed very few (if any) programs, and they probably installed fewer registry tweaks, so it would be a moot point for many users.

ActiveSync also had Backup/Restore to back up everything on your device, but there were two problems -- it could be very slow and E-mail accounts didn't get correctly restored. Unfortunately, instead of fixing Backup/Restore, Microsoft abandoned it in ActiveSync 4.x (one of my pet peeves).

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

While I'm not a fan of the iPhone, it is now more cost effective to own a iPhone then it is a Windows Mobile device as a business user.

Can you cite a study that proves that for more than one company?

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

Microsoft has always treated Windows Mobile as a second rate product and if they put in a fraction of the time into making Windows Mobile better as they have in making the Desktop version of Windows better with Windows 7, than WM would be an unstoppable force.

Remember that the initial Handheld PCs were called "PC Companions", so of course it was a second-class citizen. However, as more things are going mobile (some people think mobile will become the only platform for many users), don't you think Microsoft will step things up? Look how they responded when Netscape came out (minus the anti-competitive and illegal things, of course ).

I think Microsoft can turn things around. Whether they will only time will tell.

Steve

[Rocco Augusto]

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

Those are nice updates, but I'd expect a bunch of updates on the first release of an OS. When the OS is 5-10 years old, how often do you think updates will be coming?

There is always room for innovation and updates and just because a product is 10 years old, if not older, doesn't mean there is not room to innovate or update. Do I think in 5 or 10 years other companies will still push out updates faster than Microsoft is doing so currently? Of course. On the same token however I also believe that if Windows Mobile is still around they will be pushing out updates a lot quicker than they are currently as well.

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

how much excitement was generated by the iPhone's App Store?

The iPhone App Store generated a ton of excitement and it still generates more everyday as you have a lot of developers that were able to quit their day jobs and make a living off their basic apps that they are selling though the store. As for the hardware, sure those are all great devices but when you start reading reviews for devices like the HTC Touch Diamond/Pro/HD and all the other new Windows Mobile Professional devices that come out the reviews usually go something like this:

"The hardware is incredible and I really like what (INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE) did to the user interface, but unfortunately once you get past the homescreen you're stuck in Windows Mobile"

As exciting as the hardware is when you can't get through a review without someone knocking the operating system, don't you think there is a problem?

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

Your questions are fair, but irrelevant to my point which addressed your original comment -- "Unfortunately Windows Mobile hasn't changed at all since I started using it on my Motorola MPx220 way back in the day." Are you still claiming that statement was true in spite of the features I presented to the contrary, or are you backpedaling and deflecting with another argument?

Not backpedaling at all. I don't really believe that a larger display or the ability to not lose my data if the battery dies is significant changes in the Windows Mobile ecosystem. Not losing your data was a no-brainer that should have been in place well before Windows Mobile 5 and having a larger display hasn't done a thing for increasing usability on our WM Standard devices. If you put a device with a screen resolution of 176x220 and 320x240 in front of a user and asked them which device had a higher resolution, I highly doubt they would be able to tell you.

As for Office, we have had applications for years that would give users the ability to work with Office documents and even after having Office on several generations of devices I have owned or played around with, using Office on a screen with such a limited resolution is always a pain in the rear. If anything, having office has been "neat" at best. If Microsoft and their OEMs released a device with a VGA resolution, that would make a huge difference and would make Office much more useable so it could have a larger impact.

I understand what you're trying to say Steve but the fundamental problems that we have been begging to be fixed for years are still there. Innovation in the technology in the operating system and not in the user interface of the OS, where consumers will spend all of their time when using their devices, is a huge mistake. They should be tackling all of these problems and not just a small handful every few years.

[Rocco Augusto]

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

I hope you weren't even close to serious with that comment. Driving a car is something that takes a lot of getting used to, but it works.

And if I bought a car where I had to press the gas a good three to four times to get it moving or the brake pedal was as big as my pinky toe I wouldn't sit around and get used to it, I would return the car and get one that did what it was suppose to do the first time and had proper sized pedals.

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

Is that really the only reason? If so, will you move back if Microsoft provides a better UI?

That is the only reason that matters to me. There are a ton of Android features that I like but I can live without almost all of them minus the intuitive user interface. If Microsoft released an updated version of the operating system that had a much cleaner user interface I would switch back in a heartbeat and send Steve Ballmer chocolate and flowers.

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

Also, does Android work the way you expected because you knew what to expect thanks to your experience with other smart phones? In other words, if you were completely new to smart phones, do you think Android would be as easy to learn?

I do and I know this because my daughter can pick up my phone and scroll through my phone book and call my parents whenever she wants to say 'hi' or pull up my applications and play Pac-Man if we're out somewhere and she’s bored and she even went into the Android Market the other day and downloaded an imitation Tron game. She did all of this without me even showing her. The first time she picked up my phone and started playing with it I went to show her how it worked and she very politely told me "I can figure it out," and she did.

The only thing my daughter could figure out without help on any of my Windows Mobile Standard devices was how to run a Bejeweled clone that I had installed. If a device is easy enough for a 5 year old to figure out without instruction, anyone can do it.

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

Sorry, but open source isn't an innovation.

Tell that to the open source community

In all seriousness though I feel in this situation the fact that Android is open source is exactly the innovation that was needed in the mobile world. Not only is the OS open source but it is backed by a company with pockets as deep as Google which means carriers and OEMs are taking this effort more seriously and in turn more and more Android based handsets will come out, each with their own tweaks that don't have to be built on top of the underlining OS such as the current generation of WM Pro devices.

It is hard to see the changes Android will have the landscape right now. Look out a good few years into the future though and I'm sure the playing field will be completely different. Whereas the iPhone was able to innovate a new era in thinking in the mobile world, Android being open source has innovated a new era of 'doing' for mobile users.

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

Can you cite a study that proves that for more than one company?

You don't need a study for that. Voice and data plans are some same for both devices currently but being able to update the iPhone via software to get the latest and greatest OS upgrades and not purchase a new device means that you will get longer use out of your iPhone then you will your Windows Mobile device since you would have to pay to upgrade the WM hardware. Hence, you save more money with the iPhone over a longer period of time.

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

Remember that the initial Handheld PCs were called "PC Companions", so of course it was a second-class citizen. However, as more things are going mobile (some people think mobile will become the only platform for many users), don't you think Microsoft will step things up?

We have all been predicting that Microsoft would step up after the release of the iPhone. I believe one day they will step up but by the time that day comes companies like Apple and Google will have already did their damage and with users only being able to get a subsidized price on a new handset every few years, that damage will be very slow to fix. Phones aren't like computers where the average user will just go out and pick one up on a whim, there is a window of opportunity with each customer and if you miss it you might miss it for years.

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

I think Microsoft can turn things around. Whether they will only time will tell.

I know Microsoft can and will turn things around if they decide to take the mobile market more seriously. Unfortunately I honestly do not think that will happen until Microsoft has lost enough marketshare to get worried.

[David Tucker]

This dicussion illustrates the biggest problem that WinMo faces right now. People are afraid of change and once something becomes successful the thought of drastically changing it scares the people who made it and many of the people who use it.

That is the best thing that the iPhone brought to the market. You can make claims that WinMo is perfect and has the best UI available but its not and it doesn't. It was excellent in 2001. But its dated and ready for a change. Companies that are ready to make that sort of jump are the ones who win the battles for consumers. I've long said that Windows isn't #1 by accident. Its because MS has always made a good OS despite the Apple fanboy claims.

Well, it goes both ways. Apple and Google have figured out something and they're doing it right. Instead of standing pat and defending the platform, Microsoft should be analyzing why those devices are doing so well.

Competition breeds innovation. And if Microsoft thinks they don't need to innovate to stay relevant then they forgot how they beat Palm at their own game by out-innovating them. This is exactly what MS did to Palm and if MS doesn't act fast it won't matter.

[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

In all seriousness though I feel in this situation the fact that Android is open source is exactly the innovation that was needed in the mobile world. Not only is the OS open source but it is backed by a company with pockets as deep as Google which means carriers and OEMs are taking this effort more seriously and in turn more and more Android based handsets will come out, each with their own tweaks that don't have to be built on top of the underlining OS such as the current generation of WM Pro devices.

You lost me with that last comment. It sounds like you're saying Android OEMs don't have to build things on top of Android, which doesn't make sense. Or are you saying that they can build stuff in the OS, not just on top of it?

However, you have to be very careful with an open source OS. What happens when OEM A tweaks the OS one way and OEM B tweaks it another way? Will updates from Google work?

Look at the problem with all of the Linux distros with completely different UIs or packaging systems. Sure, the OS may be Linux, but if versions from different companies look different to users and work differently, that's a mess. (That's one reason I'm not really in favor of pre-installed UI shells on Windows Mobile devices.)

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

It is hard to see the changes Android will have the landscape right now. Look out a good few years into the future though and I'm sure the playing field will be completely different. Whereas the iPhone was able to innovate a new era in thinking in the mobile world, Android being open source has innovated a new era of 'doing' for mobile users.

Again, I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here. But look at Linux on PCs. Has Linux radically changed the PC business? It has caused some changes certainly, but not really fundamental ones from what I can see. Linux has probably had more impact on back-end systems, though.

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

You don't need a study for that. Voice and data plans are some same for both devices currently but being able to update the iPhone via software to get the latest and greatest OS upgrades and not purchase a new device means that you will get longer use out of your iPhone then you will your Windows Mobile device since you would have to pay to upgrade the WM hardware. Hence, you save more money with the iPhone over a longer period of time.

You save money in one area, but that doesn't mean it's cheaper. I'm sure you've heard of Total Cost of Ownership (TCO). I think you would need a study to prove that the TCO of an iPhone for businesses is less than for Windows Mobile.

I remember Microsoft claiming that the TCO for Windows systems (I don't remember if that was for desktops or servers) was less than Linux despite Linux being free. Yes, I'm sure the study had some bias, but my point is that just because part of something costs less doesn't mean the whole thing does.

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

Phones aren't like computers where the average user will just go out and pick one up on a whim, there is a window of opportunity with each customer and if you miss it you might miss it for years.

I think phones are quicker to change than computers. First, most phones are still cheaper than PCs (at least when subsidized).

Second, switching PCs means a lot more reinstalling and reconfiguring than even the dreaded Windows Mobile OS upgrade.

Even with a two-year contract (or three-years in Canada) locking you into a phone and carrier, how many of us replace our PCs that often? I bought my first laptop in September 2000, my second in March 2003 (because the hard drive on the first was failing) and my latest in December 2008. Before that, I think bought desktops in 1990, 1995 and 1997/8. In almost 19 years, I thnk I've owned 6 PCs, which is longer than 3 years per PC.

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

I know Microsoft can and will turn things around if they decide to take the mobile market more seriously. Unfortunately I honestly do not think that will happen until Microsoft has lost enough marketshare to get worried.

You don't think that's already happened with the iPhone passing both Windows Mobile and RIM? I think they need to get moving now. If WM 6.5 or WM 7 don't recapture some of the buzz, it could be too late. That's not to say that I think Windows Mobile is bad or broken; I just see where the market is headed and know that Microsoft needs to play harder there.

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by David Tucker

This dicussion illustrates the biggest problem that WinMo faces right now. People are afraid of change and once something becomes successful the thought of drastically changing it scares the people who made it and many of the people who use it.

I don't think we need the loaded terms. I don't think most people are afraid or scared of change; they just prefer to avoid it until they see a lot of benefit in changing.

Originally Posted by David Tucker

That is the best thing that the iPhone brought to the market. You can make claims that WinMo is perfect and has the best UI available but its not and it doesn't. It was excellent in 2001. But its dated and ready for a change.

Who said Windows Mobile is perfect or has the best user interface? Not me, certainly. I've pointed out lots of faults. I think it's still a good operating system with an adequate UI, but I've made numerous suggestions of where things could be improved (and without having to alienate the core users).

Originally Posted by David Tucker

Companies that are ready to make that sort of jump are the ones who win the battles for consumers. I've long said that Windows isn't #1 by accident. Its because MS has always made a good OS despite the Apple fanboy claims.

While Windows might be good, it's hardly great. I think Windows Mobile is still good, but other platforms have knocked it from greatness.

As for changing, let's look at Apple. How much has the Mac OS UI fundamentally changed (which seems to be what people are calling for in Windows Mobile) since 1984? They've added features and even switched to a new base, but isn't the UI essentially similar to what it was in 1984? (I don't use Macs, so that's a question.... )

Originally Posted by David Tucker

Well, it goes both ways. Apple and Google have figured out something and they're doing it right. Instead of standing pat and defending the platform, Microsoft should be analyzing why those devices are doing so well.

We're in complete agreement here.

Originally Posted by David Tucker

Competition breeds innovation. And if Microsoft thinks they don't need to innovate to stay relevant then they forgot how they beat Palm at their own game by out-innovating them. This is exactly what MS did to Palm and if MS doesn't act fast it won't matter.

That's exactly what I mean when I've said that Microsoft has rested on their laurels for too long. As I said above, I think Microsoft may have until WM 7 to get back in the game or it may be too late. But who knows? If Apple can come from nothing to its current position, maybe Microsoft could drop almost dead and then make a huge comeback (but I don't think that's a good strategy ).

Steve

[Rocco Augusto]

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

You lost me with that last comment. It sounds like you're saying Android OEMs don't have to build things on top of Android, which doesn't make sense. Or are you saying that they can build stuff in the OS, not just on top of it?

However, you have to be very careful with an open source OS. What happens when OEM A tweaks the OS one way and OEM B tweaks it another way? Will updates from Google work?

Yes a company can choose to build in their own code and software. If a company does choose to do this they can just branch their build off from the main Android trunk and if updates come along later to Android that they want to utilize they can take those pieces and add them to their phones source code. I highly doubt Google is in charge of managing other OEMs builds of Android. Currently Google is more involved with the G1 than HTC, but that is because the G1 is their development hardware. I doubt to see that same level of integration when other OEMs start releasing handsets.

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

Look at the problem with all of the Linux distros with completely different UIs or packaging systems. Sure, the OS may be Linux, but if versions from different companies look different to users and work differently, that's a mess. (That's one reason I'm not really in favor of pre-installed UI shells on Windows Mobile devices.)

I would have to disagree with this. Within the past few years the mainstream has pretty much adopted Ubuntu as the face of Linux and if you used Ubuntu you would see that it is incredible well built and works beautifully. While there are different desktop environments in Ubuntu, non of them are that drastically different from Windows that a new user would be completely lost.

The main problem with Linux, one that will not be fixed anytime soon, is the community around Linux. It is extremely difficult for those new to Linux to get help from the community without that some troll making them feel like an idiot for needing help and in turn those users stop using Linux based systems out of frustration and move back to Windows or OS X.

Fortunately Android has non of the problems that Linux users face on the desktop. There is no messing with a terminal or figuring out tarballs or any other super hardcore geeky things that are needed knowledge wise to pick up the handset and start using it. Remember, its easy enough for my 5 year old to figure out, obviously it isn't the evil difficult beast everyone thinks Linux is.

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

Again, I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here. But look at Linux on PCs. Has Linux radically changed the PC business? It has caused some changes certainly, but not really fundamental ones from what I can see. Linux has probably had more impact on back-end systems, though.

Linux on the desktop has nothing to do with Android. You can't say Android will not make a impact just because of how fractered you feel the desktop environment is.

In 2008 Linux drastically changed the PC market with the sudden surge of netbooks. Almost every netbook on the market, which are selling like hotcakes, comes in a Linux flavor and most come in a Windows XP flavor. Dell now sells computers that come with Ubuntu installed. Wal-Mart, the worlds largest retailer, has been selling laptops and desktops with Linux installed all year round. Yes Linux is not taking chunks out of Microsoft's marketshare but given 5 or 10 years time and that could change drastically with the incredibly low price to entry. Take Brazil for example, their entire government and school system is running on open source operating systems and software. That is a whole country that made the leap.

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

You save money in one area, but that doesn't mean it's cheaper. I'm sure you've heard of Total Cost of Ownership (TCO). I think you would need a study to prove that the TCO of an iPhone for businesses is less than for Windows Mobile.

You really don't need a study. Currently Apple phone hardware is priced lower than comparable Windows Mobile hardware saving you $100 before you even walk out the door. Monthly service and data are the same price, so no difference there. Both Windows Mobile and Apple's iPhone can sync with Exchange so if a company is buying either device they most likely already have the environment set up.

The only other expense I can think of that a company would buy for their employees are application and a majority of the applications for Apple's iPhone are less expensive then their Windows Mobile counterparts.

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

I think phones are quicker to change than computers. First, most phones are still cheaper than PCs (at least when subsidized).

In my experience people buy new computers fast than they buy phones. When I use to work retail almost every individual I sold a computer to would complain that they just bought a new computer a year or two prior but the darn thing just started running slowly and crashing so they came out to get a new machine. Out of the billions of desktops out there a large majority of those users do not understand that you can fix almost all of those problems that plague their systems.

However working in the cellphone industry they taught us that on average a user purchases a new phone almost every 3-4 years under normal circumstances.

Either way the point of my statement was that a person can go and buy a new computer whenever they want but they do not have that luxury with a phone. When you purchase a new phone in most cases you are making a multi-year commitment to that device and after a set grace period depending on where you live you cannot easily move to a different device if you are unsatisfied. Once you lose those customers to another operating system in the mobile world it is very difficult to win those customers back and if you do it takes years to get them back on your device and platform.

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

You don't think that's already happened with the iPhone passing both Windows Mobile and RIM? I think they need to get moving now. If WM 6.5 or WM 7 don't recapture some of the buzz, it could be too late. That's not to say that I think Windows Mobile is bad or broken

I agree, they do need to get a move on but I don't think they are taking the iPhone threat seriously. If they were we would not have gone as long as we have without a new update. Also I don't think Windows Mobile is bad, but I do feel it is broken as far as usability is concerned. It has been broken for years, we have all complained about it, it is just a lot easier to see how broken it is when we now have two very capable competitors that are seriously shaking up the market place.

Microsoft was given more than enough notice about the iPhone and Android before both systems were released. The iPhone was shown off in what, January? And then released in June or July? We're going on almost two years since the announcment of the iPhone and we still have nothing in our corner to come close to standing up to the very user friendly platform. Android is a different beast all together. We got wind of its release almost a year before it hit the market! It isn't like these devices just came out of left field, Microsoft had fair warning they were coming and ignored the dangers.

[PROlenick]

I've been using Pocket PCs since the long-departed hp Jornada series, went converged with the 1xRTT Samsung i700, and then moved to the Verizon/Audiovox XV-6600 for faster internet connectivity via EVDO - and have been stuck there ever since.

I must be on at least my sixth refurbished XV-6600, stuck in PPC 2nd Edition (WM 6.1? What's that? I've never even moved to WM 5), because the damn carriers bullied the manufacturers into shrinking the screens to postage-stamp size. I won't upgrade until I can get a phone with a full-sized (3.5" diagonal) screen.

When I take out my XV-6600, I'm often asked: is that an iPhone?

Everyone knows the iPhone is black, so why am I asked that question about my silver XV-6600?

Because what the XV-6600 has in common with the iPhone is a full-sized screen!

The only Pocket PC being sold with a full-sized screen here is an hp/compaq ipaq. Unfortunately, it isn't a phone!

Imagine my dismay on learning that HTC's monster Pocket PC phone with a full-sized screen won't be sold in the United States!

If you want to make the thing more shirt pocket-friendly, you can make it thinner by skipping the mechanical keyboard. The $30 onscreen FITALY keyboard is all I've ever needed.

And a standard stereo headphone jack would be nice.

But WM doesn't have a prayer against the competition until it has a full-sized screen.