[Rocco Augusto]

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

While they aren't Microsoft, they're the company who will actually be creating the device, which gives them fairly high credibility, I think.

Steve

I don't remember the details of the story and I can't find it at the moment, but I'm pretty sure someone stated they hoped to have a device out and then a roadmap surfaced with an expected 2008/2009 WM7 device. I could be off though, its late and I can't find the original story

[Rocco Augusto]

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

While they aren't Microsoft, they're the company who will actually be creating the device, which gives them fairly high credibility, I think.

Steve

I don't remember the details of the story and I can't find it at the moment, but I'm pretty sure someone stated they hoped to have a device out and then a roadmap surfaced with an expected 2008/2009 WM7 device. I could be off though, its late and I can't find the original story

[Rocco Augusto]

Originally Posted by peterawest

Maybe they're trying to tie the two together!

This is actually something I have secretly thought about a bit in my head. Maybe WM7 won't be related in code, but there was something about one of Mary Jo Foley's ZDNet articles a while back about Windows 7 made me constantly think of Windows Mobile 7 as I read through the article.

The article was about Windows 7 being componentized and users being able to pick and choose which features they wanted to be apart of the Windows environment and download them seperately using an interface similar to Windows Update. Kind of like a more advanced upon idea of the Windows Live by moving applications that have been bundled for years with Windows outside of the code base making a generic Windows install smaller and cleaner and keeping everyone happy that complains about their bundling.

For some reason the idea of them building Windows Mobile 7 in the same way really excites me and is actually very similar to what Google is doing with Android - being able to download the apps you want and having a kind of device profile so if you lose your phone they can be restored to the new device as easily as logging in to your Google account.

There are a ton of ways in wich Microsoft can really innovate or reinvigorate the Windows Mobile landscape. They have made some mistakes in the past and spent way to much time focusing on the boring business aspect instead of the fun consumer aspect, but with the release of new and exciting devices from Apple and Google, Microsoft has no choice but to step up and do something fun and exciting.

[alcedes78]

Originally Posted by bnycastro

For me, Microsoft delaying WM7 to mid 2009 would be acceptable provided they IMPROVE / FIX existing features first and add NEW STUFF later.

Windows Mobile isn't released to OEMs as an operating system. It is released as a kit for building an operating system image. While there are certain base components that are required for the most part the OEM can choose to include or exclude the optional components as they see fit. Unlike the PC which is fairly standard and capable of running a generic OS image for WM devices the OS image is specific to the device. That excludes MS from being able to push out updates for certain OS components. Before an update can work it's way to a user the OEM has to decide to add the update to an OS image and a carrier will usually need to approve an update going out to a user. If either party has no interest in an update the user will never see it.

For details see the Windows Mobile Team Blog:
http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile/...06/477999.aspx

Originally Posted by bnycastro

5. Lock down resolutions and help authors/developers write apps that are compatible across ALL the resolutions. Here is my suggestion.
scrap 176x220

The .Net framework actually has some built in features that can do a lot of the work required to support different resolutions for the developer. Microsoft did a live webcast on it last week. http://tinyurl.com/5xgjr6

[alcedes78]

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

The article was about Windows 7 being componentized and users being able to pick and choose which features they wanted to be apart of the Windows environment and download them seperately using an interface similar to Windows Update.

That is consistent (thought not identical to ) how Windows 2008 works. Once can install or remove components to cater to the server's intended functionality and to enforce security policies. Though with Windows 2008 the components are coming from the disc, not the Internet. The Windows 2008 components in some cases are for some pretty low level functionality (ex: WiFi won't work unless you install the WiFi component).

[Janak Parekh]

Originally Posted by alcedes78

Windows Mobile isn't released to OEMs as an operating system. It is released as a kit for building an operating system image. While there are certain base components that are required for the most part the OEM can choose to include or exclude the optional components as they see fit. Unlike the PC which is fairly standard and capable of running a generic OS image for WM devices the OS image is specific to the device. That excludes MS from being able to push out updates for certain OS components.

Yes, and that's exactly what a lot of people have argued is broken, as it weakens WM's brand considerably if you don't get a uniform experience across devices and carriers. Moreover, Microsoft has actually yielded more control to the OEMs in the last few years. Earlier versions of WM did not have nearly so much modular flexibility, plus Microsoft was able to issue standardized updates (i.e., the EUUs, or End User Updates, back in the '02 days, were identical for all devices and user-installable).

--janak

[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by nmcclana

Competition has really demonstrated the flaws of WM. Look at the media player for WM - WMP is a total joke.

I disagree. The biggest issues I have are that it doesn't support user codecs and that playlist editing was removed (although I hear it's back again, and there was freeware available to edit playlists anyway).

Originally Posted by nmcclana

Very few WM devices feature video acceleration, so most games are quite basic.

But that's an OEM issue, not a core OS issue.

Originally Posted by nmcclana

I can't actually 'turn my phone off'.

I can. I press and hold the End key on my Motorola Q9m and it goes off.

I think this may be a difference between Pocket PC Phone/WM Professional and Smartphone/WM Standard. And it makes some sense, because you couldn't turn Pocket PC/WM Classic devices off, either.

Personally, I don't see why people would want to turn the device off most of the time. Doing so means you don't get reminders, defeating one of the major features of smart phones. If you don't want calls, turn the phone's radio off.

The only time I turn my phone off is if the battery is very low, I may want to make a call later and I'm not near a charger.

Originally Posted by nmcclana

I guess the only thing that upsets me is how MSFT takes a lot of time and effort building an ecosystem - Developers, OEM's, websites like this one, software vendors, etc, and proceeds to leave them hanging.

I don't think Microsoft built the ecosystem as much as you do -- developers came because it was cool, Web sites popped up because fans wanted to share stuff (although I believe Microsoft did pay to start Smartphone Thoughts, but that seems to be the exception, not the rule).

Originally Posted by nmcclana

It does seem that the 'pre-phone' mobile Os'es have had a painful transition, doesn't it?

Not really. Until the iPhone and Android, WM was probably considered one of the top two or three (if not the top) smart phone operating systems (BlackBerry and Symbian being the others).

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by Janak Parekh

Yes, and that's exactly what a lot of people have argued is broken, as it weakens WM's brand considerably if you don't get a uniform experience across devices and carriers.

And OEMs adding shells to pretty up Windows Mobile aren't doing it a favor, either.

As Rocco said, Microsoft should be doing the UI innovations. Too bad they're so slow at it.

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Let me give my spin on your suggestions....

Originally Posted by bnycastro

1. Internet Explorer Mobile

Of course. However, the only two issues I really have are the lack of tabbed browsing and the limited zoom range (even set to maximum, I need a magnifier to read most Web pages).

I'd also like the ability to search on a page and view the source.

Originally Posted by bnycastro

2. Media Player - add podcast support [also on the desktop version please!] and make it more efficient it just chows down on RAM like there's no tomorrow.

As mentioned above, user codecs would be my biggest request. I don't think I've ever listened to a podcast. (I tried one once on my Q9m, but it was so big I couldn't download it.)

Originally Posted by bnycastro

3. MMS - it's 2008 and MMS is still not native to the mobile OS?

MMS isn't standard across carriers, is it?

Personally, I think MMS pretty much stinks anyway. E-mail in HTML or with attachments should handle most things in the future.

Originally Posted by bnycastro

4. Windows Update - either use it or scrap it...

I think carriers are the bottleneck here. There's no need to scrap it, though.

Originally Posted by bnycastro

5. Lock down resolutions and help authors/developers write apps that are compatible across ALL the resolutions. Here is my suggestion.
scrap 176x220
scrap 240x240
min 240x320 [for wm std/classic/pro]
scrap 320x320
mid 480x640 [for wm classic/pro]
scrap 480x800
max 960x1280 [for wm classic/pro/wince etc etc]

Maybe getting rid of 176x220 is OK now, but eliminating the rest kills a bunch of current devices. (And you forgot 480x480, which nobody has ever used as far as I know. )

I also think it's time to support 24-bit color depth before supporting higher resolutions like 960x1280.

Originally Posted by bnycastro

6. Merge WM std and pro.

I partially agree in two areas. First, the two platforms should have the same level of applications (the Smartphone Tasks shouldn't be emasculated, for example). Second, the two systems should support the same APIs as much as possible, so that programs can be easily written to work on both platforms.

However, I'm not sure completely merging the user interfaces would be a good thing. For example, I don't think adding soft keys to WM Classic (the basic Pocket PC OS) was really an improvement over menu and tool bars. WM Classic devices don't have hardware softkey buttons, so the user doesn't really gain anything by having them.

Originally Posted by bnycastro

7. Office Mobile - add ability to create and edit PowerPoint files improve Word, Excel and OneNote

Sure, but they improved Word and Excel a lot since WM 2003 days. Personally, i don't use them enough to notice, though.

One thing that you didn't mention is more flexible alarms. This means both an improved Alarms program (as many as I want, customizable events, etc.) and more snooze options (including user-specified ones like Handheld PCs had).

Steve

[BlackDiamond]

Originally Posted by Rocco Augusto

but to be completely honest I really didn't expect to see Windows Mobile 7 hit the mainstream the latter half of 2009.

How can you say that though you never had any information about about WM7?

Me and I think everyone else here is irritated by this statement from you.

[Rocco Augusto]

Originally Posted by BlackDiamond

How can you say that though you never had any information about about WM7?

Me and I think everyone else here is irritated by this statement from you.

Last thing I was trying to do was irritate anyone but history has shown us that with the last few Windows Mobile releases, information starts to slowly trickle out around this time and the end of the year. We then get an official announcement from Microsoft. A few months later we start to see release roadmaps from manufactures and then a few months after that we start to see widespread saturation of the new OS in the mobile market either in the form of new devices or upgrades to existing most recently released handsets.

I would love to see this process cleaned up and for releases to get in the hands of consumers faster but until we hear something official from Microsoft we can only speculate on the release due to their previous actions.