[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry

Likely, but it is a fair comment - no point in complaining about broken features in an old version.

True, and never overestimate the user. How many users have you seen come to forums and post what are basically obvious questions that would have been resolved by looking at the manual or doing a simple search?

In this case, it appears that WMDC 6.1 came out over a year ago, and if somebody didn't see news posts in the forum about it then, how will they know it exists? Does WMDC automatically check for updates? Does Windows Update offer to update it? (I don't know, and it's been months since I installed it, so I don't remember.)

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry

Likely, but it is a fair comment - no point in complaining about broken features in an old version.

True, and never overestimate the user. How many users have you seen come to forums and post what are basically obvious questions that would have been resolved by looking at the manual or doing a simple search?

In this case, it appears that WMDC 6.1 came out over a year ago, and if somebody didn't see news posts in the forum about it then, how will they know it exists? Does WMDC automatically check for updates? Does Windows Update offer to update it? (I don't know, and it's been months since I installed it, so I don't remember.)

Steve

[Ed Hansberry]

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

Does WMDC automatically check for updates? Does Windows Update offer to update it? (I don't know, and it's been months since I installed it, so I don't remember.)

No, and to make matters worse, as I recall it won't even be offered by WU unless your device is docked when you check for new updates.

[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry

No, and to make matters worse, as I recall it won't even be offered by WU unless your device is docked when you check for new updates.

Seriously? That would be like not offering Windows Media updates unless you were playing music or watching video.

I can understand not offering the update to people who aren't using it, but that could be based on whether you've ever created a partnership.

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by yyl

You know, some other companies (like the "fruit company") actually releases many firmware and software updates to just "fix bugs".

I think some companies do that. For example, I remember getting Microsoft updates on my older iPAQs. Motorola also released 3 or 4 updates for the original Q.

They're a pain to install, because you often have to hard reset your device, but they exist.

Steve

P.S. Let's not bash the Microsoft employee who was actually trying to be helpful and give us insight into what's happening behind the scenes. We want to encourage more participation, not less.

[Janak Parekh]

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

I think some companies do that. For example, I remember getting Microsoft updates on my older iPAQs. Motorola also released 3 or 4 updates for the original Q.

It's significantly worse than it used to be, however. It's up to individual OEMs and carriers, instead of Microsoft, and many of them don't regularly release updates, if at all.

They're a pain to install, because you often have to hard reset your device, but they exist.

... unlike some other platforms, which support clean upgrades. I've never had to hard reset or reinstall my iPhone. In fact, when I got the 3G, I restored the 2G image and it worked seamlessly, and that was after about 4 upgrades on the 2G. I've since installed 3? 4? more updates on the 3G without problems.

--janak

[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by Janak Parekh

It's significantly worse than it used to be, however. It's up to individual OEMs and carriers, instead of Microsoft, and many of them don't regularly release updates, if at all.

I think one reason that it's gotten worse is because of convergence. Before phones were put in PDAs, it just required Microsoft and the OEM to release an update. With phones, the carrier is also involved, requiring time to test the changes to ensure that they don't affect their network.

I'm not sure how Apple managed to convince carriers to either avoid the testing or do it more quickly. I can only assume the demand for the iPhone made some carriers willing to risk it.

Steve

[Janak Parekh]

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

I think one reason that it's gotten worse is because of convergence. Before phones were put in PDAs, it just required Microsoft and the OEM to release an update. With phones, the carrier is also involved, requiring time to test the changes to ensure that they don't affect their network.

That's only one of several reasons. Even before Pocket PC Phones were popular, HP stopped delivering regular ROM updates for their products, and Microsoft ditched the EUU update model, which allowed cross-Pocket PC upgrades, and switched to AKUs, which requires OEM integration.

I'm not sure how Apple managed to convince carriers to either avoid the testing or do it more quickly. I can only assume the demand for the iPhone made some carriers willing to risk it.

How about RIM's Blackberry? You can readily get updates straight from RIM for it, I believe. The key difference is that Microsoft doesn't manufacture the hardware, and their OEM contracts have forced them into an inferior position. Time will tell if Microsoft remedies this for future WM versions, but so far it's been a disappointment, and will hurt them in the long run if they don't rectify it soon (e.g., how do vulnerabilities get patched? That's a key question for corporate deployments).

--janak