Log in

View Full Version : Would You Pay A Premium For A Device With One Guaranteed Upgrade?


Ed Hansberry
02-19-2007, 12:00 PM
Mike over at Smartphone Thoughts <i>(possibly to be known as "Standard Thoughts" given the platform renaming? ;-))</i> asked a very good question. Essentially, he is wondering how many of us would pay a premium for a device if it came with a single operating system upgrade guarantee to the next version. The previous model has been for us to buy devices, then all of the OEMs get together in a smoke filled room and roll a zocchihedron to see which unfortunate OEM made the device that has to have an upgrade prepared for it, whereby the end user is charged $30 or so, plus an inexplicable 30% handling and postage fee. The remaining OEMs breath a sigh of relief and hope their luck holds out again next year.<br /><br />So let's turn the question around. What if a device were offered with an Upgrade Guarantee to the next Windows Mobile version that was released? It would have to be a guarantee of a full version upgrade. No sneaking in a big service pack like MSFP or anything, but a full version upgrade. I know I would.

Mike Temporale
02-19-2007, 01:48 PM
(possibly to be known as "Standard Thoughts" given the platform renaming? ;-))

:twak: &lt;grumble, grumble /> :wink:


Back on topic... I'm sick of buying new hardware just because the OS has been updated. I like my phone and I want to keep using it until some better hardware comes along - not just a better OS.

juni
02-19-2007, 01:58 PM
"Professional thoughts"? ;)

SteveHoward999
02-19-2007, 02:05 PM
I voted yes. I didn't mean that I'd buy any old device and stump up extra on the day of purchase for an upgrade at some unknown future date. I mean I'll buy a higher-end device, which necessarily has a premium price, and, all other things being equal, I'll select a device because it guarantees an upgrade over a similar device with no such guarentee...

... that clarification was just in case the manufacturers were thinking about a 'special tax' for users who want to pay in advance for an upgrade that just might not appear ;-)

jalex
02-19-2007, 03:31 PM
No, for two reasons:

1. I seem to be upgrading on roughly an annual basis, which keeps me pretty much on-curve.

2. How many years between full versions!?!

Paragon
02-19-2007, 03:58 PM
Naw, not for me. To me a new OS upgrade means more than just a new OS, but new and upgraded devices as well.

Upgrades take forever to reach the end user. The few OEMs that do offer upgrades wait till their new devices are in the marketplace and selling before they issue an upgrade for older units. This in the past has ALWAYS been several months.

Paying extra for a device with a FREE upgrade really means you get charged twice. Once when you buy the device with the upgrade fee, then when you pay $50.00 for shipping and handling.

Therefore, I think it would be a good idea IF, the end user could download it, or shipping was free, and if it was made available when new hardware was released.

possibly to be known as "Standard Thoughts" given the platform renaming?

Hmmm.....given that line of thinking, shouldn't this be called "Windows Mobile Thoughts" ;)

Dave

PPCRules
02-19-2007, 04:00 PM
ClassicRules??? Nah. (really stuck here with an outdated name)

On-Topic:
This is interesting to ponder, but it can't happen. Device makers could never offer this, even as an option, because it's too out of their control. There are too many variables that can make upgrading a device unfeasible (I won't even start listing them). They would be committing to an unknown entity at an unknown timeframe.

If it was offered, what would the "guarantee" part be? Your money back without interest if they are unable to deliver? Listen to people scream then. (A "guarantee" doesn't ensure the outcome; it specifies compensation if the outcome doesn't occur.)

And a guarantee is only as good as the company behind it. We have seen plenty of companies enter and leave this market.

I'd suggest not even wishing for this. Buy the device you like and expect to use it like it comes. Don't ever expect to get an upgraded OS.

Just as I predicted when WM5 came out (and it happened that way), even a lot of the devices that are currently getting promises for an upgrade will never see one. Don't expect it, and don't offer to pay ahead for it.

Paragon
02-19-2007, 04:04 PM
PPCRules, I absolutely agree with you.

Cybrid
02-19-2007, 04:12 PM
Oh, come on...

This has statistical data available...

When Dell brought out the X50v, they promised to provide an upgrade.
So did Fujitsu Siemens for the Loox 720. Then everybody did the 64Mb/128Mb debate....Mike Calligaro did the RAM vs. Power/battery article. Dell lived up to their promise albeit slowly...Fujitsu did a vanishing act.

There are no crystal balls and no one can with certainty predict that despite any company's best intentions...what the outcome will be.

Buy for now and upgrade when your needs are better served by a newer device.

paschott
02-19-2007, 04:56 PM
I wouldn't mind paying a reasonable premium if it could be guaranteed that I'd get a full version upgrade (not a .x release like SE). I have a Wizard now - a device that's fully capable of running WM6, but I'm unlikely to ever see it for my device because it isn't in the interest of the carriers to provide an upgrade. They'd rather I spring for yet another $400 device when this one isn't even a year old. I'm willing to pay for an upgrade if one's available (and the upgrade is worth the pain). However, if there's no upgrade available, I'm not going to spring for another device just to get the upgrade. There has to be an advantage to switching beyond the new OS.

Currently, I'll probably be sticking with my Wizard for a little while longer - I can't upgrade to a new device through my carrier because my time's not up on this device and there's not real incentive. Sure, the TyTn is neat, faster, etc, but not worth another $400 at this point and there's still no WM6 available for it right now.

Personally, I'd really like to see MS treat WM as a real OS - available to buy from MS, supported directly by MS. The carriers provide drivers or add-ons for their services and specific devices or something similar. At that point, we can upgrade the OS without depending on the carrier as long as it's supported by the hardware and whatever drivers are needed for the hardware will work on the new OS. I can't imagine the uproar if Dell told its customers - "Sorry, we may or may not provide an upgrade to Vista. In the meantime, if you must have Vista, buy a new Dell." That's essentially the situation we're in with WM at this time (and since PPC days).

-Pete

iPAUL
02-19-2007, 05:42 PM
Personally, I'd really like to see MS treat WM as a real OS - available to buy from MS, supported directly by MS. The carriers provide drivers or add-ons for their services and specific devices or something similar. At that point, we can upgrade the OS without depending on the carrier

I couldn't agree more.

Ed Hansberry
02-19-2007, 05:43 PM
This is interesting to ponder, but it can't happen. Device makers could never offer this, even as an option, because it's too out of their control. There are too many variables that can make upgrading a device unfeasible (I won't even start listing them).
the timeframe is consistently 15-18 months and MS generally makes the new OS capable of working on the previous generation of devices. why do you think Dell provided tons of ROM in the X50 and what devicas do you think MS uses for beta testing? not the new stuff certainly, always the current stuff. doesn't mean 100% current generation devices could upgrade, but those that can't are generally inadequate for the OS they are sold with.

buzzard
02-19-2007, 05:58 PM
No, I would not pay extra to get a "free" upgrade. I would be afraid that if I did I would get a great upgrade like the Wm5 upgrade for the HP 4700...what a thing of beauty that was.

Paragon
02-19-2007, 05:59 PM
why do you think Dell provided tons of ROM in the X50

I think that was a bad example to use, Ed. Dell had thousands, and thousands of complaints, and there were several petitions for Dell to fix the x50 to WM5.0 upgrade. Chips used in previous devices were far too slow to be used with persistent storage, therefore many, such as the x50 did not work well with WM5.0. Given that, I think PPCRues' statement is rather valid. Can an OEM, or carrier garantee that MS will not make changes in the next OS that are not condusive to use on an older device? The answer to that is no. If there are changes made like that, an OEM or carrier is going to be faced with the cost of producing an upgrade that doesn't work well, or face the lawsuits that they are hit with because they couldn't produce on a garantee they made. Not to mention all the bad press they will get either way.

If I'm a carrier or OEM there's no way I'm going to stick my neck in that noose and hope no one unlatches the trap door.

Dave

WyattEarp
02-19-2007, 06:43 PM
I'd do it, based on the fact that my 4700 although old now is still a smokin' device, is more than capable of running WM6 and nothing with better specs has been released. While there are many pros and cons to this, for me at least in the case of the 4700 (and others devices I have see) the pros out weigh the cons. Manufactures may be slow to release and OS upgrade before their own devices featuring the new OS are out but what happens when none of the newer devices are up to par. Too many of the WM5 devices for example took a step backwards leaving many who wanted a new device dissapointed. Some devices are just never really topped by the newest offering.

andbrown
02-19-2007, 09:39 PM
I think this poll would be better framed as "how much would you pay on top of the standard device price in order to be guaranteed one full OS upgrade"? Then have a range of answers $0-$100.

gt24
02-20-2007, 03:51 AM
As somebody waiting for a Vista Express Upgrade for an HP laptop... and hearing that the Vista CD will ship months and months LATER than the prior delay... well, upgrades are nice but can cause quite a bit of headache.

I vote yes because upgrades are something that I do want... but considering how many companies anticipated Vista (see above) and other upgrade woes on the Windows Mobile front and alike... it doesn't seem very likely to ever be true.

Also, as a sidenote, I'm not saying the OEMs are at fault here... (ok, they might partially be at fault...) Perhaps Vista had a drastic change before release that made an OEM shipment a nightmare. After all, previously mentioned in this thread is that the Axim X50 simply had ROM that was too slow for the shipping version of Windows Mobile 5. A guaranteed upgrade is a rock and a hard place proposition, not one that can always be anticipated either.

It would be nice if Windows Mobile devices worked more like Windows machines... with Microsoft providing the upgrade. However, I don't know how many OEMs will write the drivers for the next OS, so I don't know if the point would be moot.

SteveHoward999
02-20-2007, 04:24 PM
It would be nice if Windows Mobile devices worked more like Windows machines... with Microsoft providing the upgrade. However, I don't know how many OEMs will write the drivers for the next OS, so I don't know if the point would be moot.

You know, a mobile device is a fixed piece of hardware that can accept a small number of external peripherals, and can run any of a few thousand pieces of sofware.

A PC is a nebulous device that can have any component switched out for any of a zillion others. It can have extra components added. It can run any of about 4 zillion external peripherals and countless software applications.

The Mobile device, who's hardware essentially never changes, usually has no option to upgrade the OS.

Any PC can upgrade to at least the next generation OS - not saying you really would want to run Wondows 2000 on a 100MHz PC, but I've seen it done.

It raises questions in my mind about exactly who it is who controls the upgrade to the mobile device...

Paragon
02-20-2007, 04:40 PM
It raises questions in my mind about exactly who it is who controls the upgrade to the mobile device...

There's absolutely no question who controls them, it's the carriers, and OEMs. Just as Microsoft, they'll tell you. ;) Just kidding. It really is the carriers and friends.

SteveHoward999
02-20-2007, 05:05 PM
There's absolutely no question who controls them, it's the carriers, and OEMs. Just as Microsoft, they'll tell you. ;) Just kidding. It really is the carriers and friends.

OK I know - I was pointing out that the world at large is already comfortable with having control over their own OS upgrades ...

egarayblas
02-24-2007, 02:28 AM
If I were also given the chance to downgrade aside from upgrading anytime, then I'd say YES based on a developer's point of view. This offer would be advantageous for us developers because it is more cost-effective for us to buy OS upgrades than buy new devices just to make sure our software runs on the latest ones. :)