Mini-Microsoft on the State of Windows Mobile

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://minimsft.blogspot.com/2009/10/windows-7-and-grab-bag-of-microsoftness.html' target='_blank'>http://minimsft.blogspot.com/2009/1...rosoftness.html</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"Holy. Crap. I don't think we have any unbruised skin left on our body to take any more lumps regarding our mobile strategy. The Microsoft Mismanagement theory is in full force as we throw any willing body into the Mobile effort...Look. Let's talk about device loyalty. I first started with owning PocketPCs. An HP Jornada. I loved it. When upgrade time came, HP had bought Compaq and abandoned the Jornada for the iPAQ (what, they had the iThing first?). So, unable to upgrade to the next CE, I cursed a little and bought one of those iPAQs. But HP decided not to allow it to be upgraded. So I switched to Dell to get their latest Axim PocketPC. Dell would be a safe bet, right? And Dell gave up on the line. My latest act of company loyalty: getting a powerful HTC WinMo 6 device. It was cut-off the 6.5 train, and soon, I'm going to be buying a new phone. And I'm going to buy an iPhone."</em></p><p><a href="http://minimsft.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">The blog run by Mini-Microsoft</a> has always been a fascinating read, though I confess I haven't checked it out in quite a few months - I really wish there was an RSS to Email subscription form because I'm RSS-phobic now. But I digress...Mini-Microsoft is a Microsoft employee, likely in a fairly senior position, who uses anonymity to write some very poignant things about the state of Microsoft as a company. His (her?) take on the state of mobile at Microsoft is particularly accurate - Microsoft's decision years ago to completely cede authority to the carriers has resulted in a long string of bad decisions and poor treatment of customers. The carriers may want customers to think of their expensive smartphones are being disposable, but most customers don't think that way when they've spend $200+ (or much more unlocked) for a high-end smartphone. Mini-Microsoft correctly pegs this problem as one of leadership - and while I hear things are getting better, these new leaders have a lot of damage to undo.</p><p>I read recently that one of the reasons why Microsoft hasn't done better in the mobile space is because the revenues simply don't amount to much - Microsoft never took this space seriously in the past because it wasn't making enough money off it. They entered this business because they felt they should be in the space rather than let their competitors completely control it - just look at the Zune for another example of this - but ultimately, they didn't really care about it. Given what we've heard from Steve Ballmer over the past 12 months about Windows Mobile, I think that the leadership finally does care about the mobile space. The question is, what are they going to do about it?</p>

[alex_kac]

Given what we've heard from Steve Ballmer over the past 12 months about Windows Mobile, I think that the leadership finally does care about the mobile space.

I just can't agree with this. Ballmer has said things 5 years ago, 4 years ago, and so on about how WM was so great and how they care and how they are the leader and yet nothing has shown them doing anything about it.

I really dislike Ballmer. Gates was good.

[frankenbike]

I think the corporate justification for WM/PPC was always to use it as an extension for selling Microsoft Office, with the main selling point being the synchronization with Office.

Now they're caught in a battle for market share, in an environment where the market is to sell Microsoft's corporate image as being in touch with the technical marketplace, while there's really no money to be made in the market itself. And MS is losing, because it doesn't make sense to invest heavily in a market where you aren't going to make money...

So every iPhone sold sells more people on Apple. The iPhone is its own complex form of advertising.

And now Android, what appears to be the very first open architecture phone OS, is making headway into the market. Superficially, it beats Windows Phone, but WP has a depth that gives it a serious edge to anyone who knows it well. And it would be doing better if some cloud service providers weren't being petulant (hear me Pandora and Google?). It would also be better in the long run, if Microsoft weren't so insistent on putting it's own solutions before the potential users.

There should be a chat program included that has AIM/Yahoo/Google/MS all in one IM ap. It might even include mail functionality like Digsby does. The Web Browsers are notoriously unfun for this stuff. And why does the phone still not have full flash functionality? It's better than it was, but I can still only get Justin.tv through Skyfire, which drains your battery like nothing else? (But it is still an amazing browser).

Still, Windows Phone does kick ass if you need what it has. And it kicks the crap out of my wife's Env Touch, though I couldn't convince her to like any smartphone for some reason.

[Jason Dunn]

I just can't agree with this. Ballmer has said things 5 years ago, 4 years ago, and so on about how WM was so great and how they care and how they are the leader and yet nothing has shown them doing anything about it.

That's a good point, though I don't recall Gates or Ballmer ever talking so openly about how Windows Mobile is slow to market with a new version, how they wish Windows Mobile 7 was already out, etc. In previous years it was "We're competitive! Check us out!" and this year it's been "Yeah, we know we're behind...".

[ucfgrad93]

I think Windows Mobile is in a world of hurt right now. In my opinion, they have repeated the mistakes of Palm in that they got stagnant. Microsoft really hasn't done much to catch the eye of the average consumer like Apple and Android OS have done. In addition, most people aren't going to shell out big bucks to buy a new phone just to get a new version of WM. They see the upgrades by Apple, Palm, & Google and wonder why their phone doesn't get a new OS. For the last year or two Apple and Android have been getting all of the press and attention. It is going to be very difficult for Microsoft to reclaim that.

I hate that I've been so loyal to the PocketPC platform and Windows Mobile but I've finally had my chain yanked for the last time. I'm not buying a 6.5 device only to have it abandoned when 7 comes out.

In this case, Microsoft is going to have to earn me back and convince that not only do they have a better experience and better quality phone but that they also won't kick me off to the side of the road when a new release comes along, spinning a sad tale that the carriers make all the decisions.

I love these, and minimsft hit this one out of the park!

[Xentrax]

Mini is correct. The reality of Windows Mobile is that the device lives only about a year; then vendor stops supporting it. Even major bugs left unfixed. Rarely we can expect to get official OS version update. The latter I'm afraid is caused by Microsoft itself. Microsoft should have offered uprade for existing devices for free to vendors.


Another thing is the same as for OEM vendors of desktop Windows: crapware. But it's much worse on Windows Mobile because you can't uninstall it. Preinstalled crap takes precious Storage space. After average user installs a couple of apps and downloads a month's worth of email and opens a couple of web pages, typical year 2008 WM6.1 device will have only 2-3MB of Storage memory left. Compare that to 8GB iPhone.


Adding to the mix are idiotic limitations like system default Open File Dialog which is complete garbage and every application vendor has to recode it on its own. That includes MS's own apps like Pocket Word.

[whydidnt]

It is sad that even Microsoft executives feel the same many of us long time Windows Mobile users do, yet nothing seems to change. We have been hearing for years and years that updates were restricted by carriers, that they were too hard and expensive. Yet, we are seeing both Apple and Google deliver regular updates to their devices, seemingly without significant issue. What is the real story?

How could a company that built itself on technology become so ignorant to the migration from desktop to mobile, and so greedy that it seemed to ignore the movement to continue racking profits on the desktop.

What's scary is how close Google is becoming to owning the cloud because they had the vision to see how computing was going to change, rather than trying to muscle every last cent out of the primary desktop search business. In many ways Microsoft's decisions mirror the same sort of short-sightedness that we've seen Wall Street severely pay for over the past 24 months; where every decision seems to be made based upon this quarters numbers, instead of what is best for the long term good of the company.

[leslietroyer]

I have to agree with him.. I was a very very long time WinCE supporter, both on the PPC and Phone fronts. I still have and use my Dell X5, my first windows phone was a audiovox Thera, and I've been thru ~5-6 other winmobile phones since ending with a Moto-Q9. I'm now sporting a iPhone & Loving IT. I felt bad at first, but no longer. MS needs to get it upgrade stuff togeather, it alway frustrated me that I had to switch phones to get the features of the new OS...

LEs

[Jason Dunn]

While I agree with most of your points, I don't with this one:

The latter I'm afraid is caused by Microsoft itself. Microsoft should have offered uprade for existing devices for free to vendors.

I think it's fair to blame Microsoft for having such a FUBAR'd system in the first place, but I think the real blame for us not getting the updates belongs to the carriers and the OEMs. Microsoft released WM 6.1 for free if memory serves, yet how many phones actually got it? My Samsung Blackjack II on Rogers did, but my wife's HTC S640 didn't - because Telus decided to cancel the 6.1 release and now this phone, about a year old, is "forgotten" already. HTC takes a lot of the blame here too - they're using software as a differentiator in their phones, so when they come up with a new version of TouchFlo 3D/HTC Sense they only provide it on the new phones - even though the Touch Diamond and Touch Pro2 have the specs to run it perfectly fine. Rather than relying on hardware innovation, HTC is using artificial limits like only releasing new software for new phones and leaving users of "old" phones (like, six months old) high and dry.

[Fritzly]

While I agree with most of your points, I don't with this one:



I think it's fair to blame Microsoft for having such a FUBAR'd system in the first place, but I think the real blame for us not getting the updates belongs to the carriers and the OEMs.

Well. yes and not; of course carriers and hardware manifacturers would prefer you to buy new equipment but so would do Dell, HP etc.
The updates for my OSes are handled by MS not Dell and this makes the difference.

[Jason Dunn]

Yet, we are seeing both Apple and Google deliver regular updates to their devices, seemingly without significant issue. What is the real story?

Well, with Apple they have a ridiculously easy job because they have one form factor, one screen resolution, etc. With Google, we're actually starting to see them have the Microsoft problem - there are some updates for Android that aren't coming out for all phones...I think the new HTC Sense for instance isn't coming for all previous Android phones, only some of the newer ones. So HTC is bringing the same problems they have with Windows Mobile to Android... :rolleyes:

[Jason Dunn]

Well. yes and not; of course carriers and hardware manifacturers would prefer you to buy new equipment but so would do Dell, HP etc. The updates for my OSes are handled by MS not Dell and this makes the difference.

I don't quite follow you. The version of Windows Mobile that Microsoft hands off to the OEMs simply would not work on your device until the OEMs do their driver work and other low-level stuff. The working version of Windows Mobile that you have on your device is a combination of Microsoft and OEM/carrier work, so even if Microsoft wanted to, they couldn't release the OS directly to the public without significantly changing the way the OS works (which I think they need to do...we're talking hardware abstract layer, etc.).

[mbranscum]

Jason,

What phone are you using right now?

[Jason Dunn]

What phone are you using right now?

My sad old Samsung Blackjack II with Windows Mobile 6.1. I have an AT&T Pure here as well, though because of the way AT&T locked it down, I can't create a data connection for my network (Rogers) so I haven't been able to fully use it.

[mbranscum]

My sad old Samsung Blackjack II with Windows Mobile 6.1. I have an AT&T Pure here as well, though because of the way AT&T locked it down, I can't create a data connection for my network (Rogers) so I haven't been able to fully use it.

I have a Pure too. Cooked ROM, problem solved! :)

[Jason Dunn]

I have a Pure too. Cooked ROM, problem solved! :)

I don't go that route.

[mbranscum]

I don't go that route.

How about a registry edit? This worked on the Fuze. Haven't tested it on the Pure yet.

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Comm\InternetSharing\settings\

DELETE the Key: “ForceCellConnection”

[Jason Dunn]

How about a registry edit? This worked on the Fuze. Haven't tested it on the Pure yet.

Now that's something I don't mind doing. :D I knew there was a way to do that, but hadn't bothered to look into it. Thanks!

[mbranscum]

Now that's something I don't mind doing. :D I knew there was a way to do that, but hadn't bothered to look into it. Thanks!

Hope it works. Sorry, I didn't mean to get carried away and highjack the thread...back on topic! ;)

This is one big reason I love WM. You won't see anyone heavily customizing the iphone. It's stable, but locked down. There are so many ways to edit the OS and tweak WM!

[Gerard]

I put it to you that the many volunteers who cook custom ROM images for users prove that it is not really beyond Microsoft's powers to release OS upgrades for end users directly. Sure, there are a lot of devices, different screen resolutions and button layouts. But if solitary, part-time hobbyists are able to re-invent existing ROM versions to suit alternate devices, it seems a bit of a stretch to suggest that only the relatively vast resources of a major OEM could do the same.

When I had an O2 Atom, I upgraded it to WM6.1 without a hitch. Now with my HTC Touch Elfin (older, slow data connection version with a Rogers stamp on the back) I use WM6.5, have tried a dozen or so flavours actually, without any serious issues. Same goes for a great many other devices which can be user-upgraded, though there are some which cannot.

My hunch is that this is a philosophical stance being taken by Microsoft, based in part on 'the letter' Gates wrote all those years ago admonishing hobbyists not to 'rip off' developers. To me, and I am far from alone in this, it is the OEMs, and by extension Microsoft (as they profit from gross sales too!) who are ripping end users off by so often insisting that buying a new device is the only way to keep up with new OS tweaks. And really they are tweaks, as nothing very earth-shattering has happened in WM in the past bunch of years. Oh sure, there are all sorts of 'shells' available for a price or from HTC or Toshiba or other makers, but the actual OS is still festooned with nagging glitches galore.

Take the way it still takes umpteen taps to delete an appointment, with no multi-select available for deleting multiple appointments. Surely it can't be that hard to add a 'Ctrl' icon to the tooltray in Calendar to allow multiple items to be selected. Birdsoft did something like that with their Ulti-Planner years ago, allowing selective clearing of past appointments. I spend far too many seconds every day clearing items, when really such efforts should be effortless. And there are dozens of such simple UI elements getting in the way of a truly comfortable user experience, which for some reason Microsoft is too busy or too lazy to amend.

It is somewhat heartening to see the Android and iPhone competition finally putting a real fire under MS Mobile, where Palm failed so miserably in earlier years to inspire. Maybe before long we'll see something beyond a vague complaint about wishing WM7 were out already, and some leaps and bounds might just start appearing. For my part, I'm still interested in a WM device for my next phone. But wow, I've been deeply impressed by several of the instrument tuning programs for the iPhone... and the incredibly accurate response of the microphone, sensitive all the way down to 32Hz and even a bit lower - I make the odd doublebass C-extension, and tuning the stops with my phone is hopeless, and frankly embarrassing when faced with iPhone users such as so many of my clients now are. Musicians tend to use simple gadgets that do the job needed reliably. The iPhone does that job very, very well, saving them having to carry around a dedicated digital tuner. Lets them listen to tunes, too... and the speaker is likewise impressive.

[doogald]

Well, with Apple they have a ridiculously easy job because they have one form factor, one screen resolution, etc. With Google, we're actually starting to see them have the Microsoft problem - there are some updates for Android that aren't coming out for all phones...I think the new HTC Sense for instance isn't coming for all previous Android phones, only some of the newer ones. So HTC is bringing the same problems they have with Windows Mobile to Android... :rolleyes:

One thing to note, though, is that Apple insisted that they retain far more control of their device and platform than carriers were ever giving to anybody else. Part of that was they knew they had the power to do so, leveraging the popularity of the iPod, but Cinguar/AT&T gave Apple far more control of what their device would and would not be allowed to do on their network than any carrier had given to any other phone platform. Unofficial stories are that Apple approached Verizon first with exclusivity but that Verizon was unwilling to cede that much control or allow anyone not to have an icon for Vcast on their phone (a joke, sort of.)

When Microsoft and their OEM partners were first pitching smartphones based on PPC/WM, I'd think they did not have this leverage with the carriers; they were merely trying ti get the devices into the stores with subsidized pricing. I suppose it's possible that Microsoft would have enough leverage with carriers to do so if they sold their own branded devices directly, but I imagine that the likelihood of this is not super high.

[ibap]

The whole process is impeded by the carriers. Instead of taking care of their customers, they'd rather have them buy new phones. So they have customers unhappy with expensive handsets, that whine until they qualify for a new one.

I had a Samsung Saga on Verizon, and they finally coughed up the update to unlock the GPS. Unfortunately, they messed with other stuff. The process to do the upgrade was awful (I've installed both upgrades and cooked ROMs on Palms) and the first one bricked, but they replaced it. But the phone was incredibly sluggish after that.

[JD Silver]

I was a Windows Mobile user and programmer for years, but I gave up on it this summer. While I enjoyed the flexibility and customization offered by the platform, I became disenchanted with the lack of bug-fixes and OS updates. Further, while you could buy a device with the latest and greatest new hardware features, most applications were designed for the "standard" platform and did not fully utilize the hardware. I now believe that the entire concept of the OS being developed by MS, then customized by OEMs, and controlled by the carriers, is a flawed model.

I now own and program an iPhone. Although I teach C, C++, and C# programming courses on Windows professionally, my personal computing is now Apple. Yes, I paid the "Apple Tax" when I made the switch this summer. But then again, many people pay the "Lexus Tax" when they choose to purchase a higher quality vehicle. I've had almost 3 decades of MS OS's, and now I want a device that works well. I rarely need to connect the iPhone to the Mac, MobileMe keeps everything up to date without the nonsense I've had trying to use ActiveSync over the years.

So now my "hobby coding" is in Objective-C, using XCode, and either Cocoa or Cocoa Touch. There are many "remarkable" similarities between .Net and Cocoa. Recall that Cocoa is really the NeXTStep class framework, which was developed in the early '90s. If fact, all of the Cocoa classes are prefixed with NS...

The downside to the iPhone is the controls placed on it by Apple. On the other hand, it works VERY well, and the hardware IS utilized by third-party developers. A locked platform also reduces security threats, and software piracy. I've watched companies like RedShift struggle to survive in the Palm and WM world, while 90% of their software "sales" were pirated. Despite the many shortcomings of the App Store, from a developer's perspective, the software is tested, signed, and cheap, discouraging piracy. The shopping experience is pretty good, and updates take place automatically.

Obviously I'm watching Android closely, and may start coding for that platform. Unfortunately, Android has the same marketing model as MS, Google develops the OS, OEMs customize it...well, you get the picture. Yes, Android is open source and free, but then again, MS only charges about $10 per device for WM. Then there is Palm with WebOS...applications must run in a browser. Sounds like Apple in 2007.

Enough...see you over in AppleThoughts!

[Jason Dunn]

One thing to note, though, is that Apple insisted that they retain far more control of their device and platform than carriers were ever giving to anybody else. Part of that was they knew they had the power to do so, leveraging the popularity of the iPod, but Cinguar/AT&T gave Apple far more control of what their device would and would not be allowed to do on their network than any carrier had given to any other phone platform.

Absolutely - there was SO much hype about the iPhone, Apple went around to the carriers and basically were looking for whomever was willing to be the most submissive to Apple's will, and AT&T won that contest. Let's face it, there was never a phone more hyped than the iPhone, so no one other than Apple could have brought a carrier to its knees. And it paid off handsomely for AT&T.

Apple helped pave the way for a good, tightly controlled end to end experience - and I think (I hope) with Windows Mobile 7 Microsoft is going to start to flex their own muscles to try and own the customer experience similar to what Apple does.

[Fritzly]

I don't quite follow you. The version of Windows Mobile that Microsoft hands off to the OEMs simply would not work on your device until the OEMs do their driver work and other low-level stuff. The working version of Windows Mobile that you have on your device is a combination of Microsoft and OEM/carrier work, so even if Microsoft wanted to, they couldn't release the OS directly to the public without significantly changing the way the OS works (which I think they need to do...we're talking hardware abstract layer, etc.).

It seems to me that you not only follow what I say....... but agree with it too. :-)

The way MS originally conceived the WM OS is the cause of the problems they are dealing with nowadays.
MS came out with a business model that heavily relayed on hardware manufacturers in order to shift the burden of "mantaining " the OS to HTC, LG etc.; in the US we have a further layer of complication which is the Carriers stronghold on the local market but this is a relative and regional issue because the US are not the most important and less than ever most profitable market for mobile phones.

When Palm collapsed MS, almost magically, became the only alternative to Nokia but.....
they completely missed the opportunity to leverage this sudden power and push an OS that would have been basically hardware agnostic to the hardware companies.

Doing that they paved the way for Apple first and Android later to become serious players in the mobile market.

[possmann]

It seems that exec's forget the lesson's learned by the very space they fill when a competitor falls - how and why the were able to fill that space wasn't necessarily a better concept but do to the mis-steps of that competition's leadership - their failure to LEAD.

MS can simply shrug their shoulders and remind us all that they are only a software company. While that may work for desktops and laptops it never works for small, highly integrated devices like the smartphone or PDA.

I too was a long time PALM user, switch to MS, had an iPaq, then a Dell and the on to the phones and was pleased to see how MS was starting to lead the charge. But then, like out of the blue things stalled and the cracks started to show...

HTC is the best thing that ever happened to MS and it's not because of their hardware but because of their skin over the standard UI. Finally someone was "getting it". But that was only the OEM and not the carrier. UGH! Yet another level to fight through.

Finally the iPhone came - and I watched. I switched to the Blackberry Storm because of work (Lotus Notes - ugh) and was surprised to see how well things worked and at the reliability of the device compared to my numerous Windows Mobile devices. Just this year, I too paid the "Apple Tax" and will never look back.

Apple's control over the hardware AND software has created a stable platform with a great UI. Sure there are things I miss with the Window Mobile, but I'm not frustrated and performance is excellent.

MS never had the lead - they had the hype and they could have built on that but let's face it - they were never committed.

[Jonthepom]

I started like minimsft with an iMate (original):

[QUOTE=ucfgrad93;714578]For the last year or two Apple and Android have been getting all of the press and attention. It is going to be very difficult for Microsoft to reclaim that.

Microsoft has already lost me - I got and Android this year and I'm going to keep it because it upgraded itself this morning.

But I am sorry to say good by to PPC Thoughts.

[Jason Dunn]

Microsoft has already lost me - I got and Android this year and I'm going to keep it because it upgraded itself this morning. But I am sorry to say good by to PPC Thoughts.

You never know what sites we'll be launching in the future, so maybe we'll have one in line with what you're now using. :D

[CeluGeek]

I'm currently rocking a Samsung Jack, which I won't even bother with the upgrade to WM 6.5, because the non-touchscreen WM 6.5 is a bad joke. Fortunately, I bought this phone on November 5, so I hope AT&T releases the BlackBerry Bold 2 before my 30-day trial is over, so I can exchange my Jack for a Bold 2.

I want my anti-iPhone to be an efficient device, and Microsoft has really dropped the ball. In the meantime, BlackBerries keep getting more apps, they have a consistent way to select text and to navigate the system, they have a clipboard that works across the board - heck even the iPhone got its clipboard before non-touchscreen Windows Mobile.

So I'm leaving WM for good, and probably not coming back since WM7 promises to be another iPhone-wannabe and I'd rather have an efficient, productive device than one that tries to look cool.

[Sven Johannsen]

I put it to you that the many volunteers who cook custom ROM images for users prove that it is not really beyond Microsoft's powers to release OS upgrades for end users directly. Sure, there are a lot of devices, different screen resolutions and button layouts. But if solitary, part-time hobbyists are able to re-invent existing ROM versions to suit alternate devices, it seems a bit of a stretch to suggest that only the relatively vast resources of a major OEM could do the same.
I think this deserves a little rebuttal. While it is clearly possible to create an upgraded ROM in a kitchen sink, it still must be customized for a particular device, if I'm not mistaken. I mean, I don't think I can grab a custom ROM for an HD2 and load it on my Pure to get the Sense UI goodness, and expect it to be stable. That means there are hobbieists creating cooked ROMs for many individual devices. If MS were to do this, they would have to do the same, create an image for each and every device available, or have some process to decide which do, or don't, get updates. Beyond that the MS 'releases' would have to be solid (or at least no worse than retail). While many of the cooked ROMs are outstanding, there is never any implication of warranty. In fact disclaimer is the watchword.

Return on investment must also be considered. Hobbyists are free. MS coders, managers, testers, marketeers, etc. cost money. Beyond the benevolence equity that MS would get out of providing the upgrades, I don't see the return in a tangible form the stockholders can get behind. Sure, you might avoid ticking of the X% that know they are using WM, and that there is a new version, and they are not getting it. Does that however offset the Y% that would have bought a new device, but didn't need to because you gave them a 'new' one. So, you have to decide on whether to spend your money making folks that already have your stuff happy, or trying to create something new that will pull more consumers in, and drive the old guard to upgrade. There's a balance there.

On a side note, getting upgrades for free has it's own issues. Take iPhone for example, since that model is oft tauted for their upgrade philanthropy. Have you noticed how the web is a-buzz with the things that don't work anymore after an iPhone update, until the hackers figure out how to crack (jailbreak) the latest version? Did you notice that the only perceptible new feature of one of the recent updates was that Palm couldn't access iTunes anymore? Apple updates are as much about retaining control of the platform as they are to benefit the consumer. Beyond that there is a decent amount of capability in the 3.0 software upgrade that requires a 3GS as opposed to just a 3G. So Apple isn't completely beyond the 'buy a new device to get the latest stuff' philosophy.

So personally, while I would love to get every new release of WM free from MS, I have learned not to expect it, have come to terms with it, understand what I am buying, and am pretty happy with the capabilities of the platform I have in my hand. To me, it is going to be a matter of what do I buy when my current contract runs out, or the itch gets too bad. There is a good chance MS has something for me that is compelling with WM7. Guess we'll see. The decision won't be based on believing I'll get WM8 though, from MS, HTC, or AT&T.

[Fritzly]

"So personally, while I would love to get every new release of WM free from MS, I have learned not to expect it, have come to terms with it, understand what I am buying, and am pretty happy with the capabilities of the platform I have in my hand. To me, it is going to be a matter of what do I buy when my current contract runs out, or the itch gets too bad. There is a good chance MS has something for me that is compelling with WM7. Guess we'll see. The decision won't be based on believing I'll get WM8 though, from MS, HTC, or AT&T."

The fact is that the rest of the World market is not strangled by carriers like here in the US.
When you pay $850 for a HTC HD2 you expect that if, for example, a "Sense 2" build is released in 6 momths it will made available to you by HTC; in the same way if WM 7 will appear within one year the same buyer could reasonably expecting to be able to upgrade to the new OS, not necessarily for free though, and do this within one month since the availability of the new software, not one year after! Obviously an OS upgrade should not cost more than $25 or something like this.

Either way MS engage hardware manufacturers to guarantee customers these kind of upgrades or MS should offer SmartPhones directly and support them.

[Gerard]

'Back in the day' (7 to 8 years ago) Microsoft was reported to be earning about $28 per license of the Pocket PC OS from the manufacturers. Nowadays it varies between about $10 and $15 as I understand it. Also back then, Compaq (then HP a bit later) offered OS upgrades for existing devices for about $30, and many were sold on CD. I don't see why MS couldn't use a similar pricing to pay for the relatively trivial development time to release custom per-device OS upgrades today, especially considering how ROM cooks have most of their work cut out in monkeying with the innards of the OS without access to the source code. MS owns that source code, and has all the nifty compiler stuff and a full department dedicated to making Windows Mobile work. If a solitary cook can customise a new WM OS for a given device (or as in the case with dsixda, for his old and his new devices which offer VERY different hardware, but for which he says it's really not all that different coding ROMs), then surely it'd be so much simpler for the authors themselves to do the same for any and every device. Sorry Sven, I don't agree. MS stands to make double, maybe triple their individual license price per device upgrade, and since the average noob isn't likely to follow that route, the OEMs still stand to sell just as many new shiny phones. I'm with Fritzly on this one. The 'good guy' points would fall to MS in the eyes of their loyal users, and a bit of that would no doubt also flow to the open market as good karma, just as you say it has for Apple, whether motivated by profit or not.

[Jason Dunn]

Well, for what it's worth, I'm going to once again pound on this issue of upgrades at this Mobius event I'm at... :)

[Sven Johannsen]

Well Gerard, guess we will just disagree on this. Seems it is largely on whether it would be profitable, beneficial, whatever word is used for the vendors to produce upgrades. I'm sure you can't be expecting it because it is the right thing to do. ;) I recall the few early PPC upgrades, both free and pay. Certainly the only return on the free ones was good will. Remember how fast the consumer worm turned when one iPaq upgrade was free, 'as it should be', and the next didn't come at all, 'I'll never buy another HP product.' I think the goodwill is pretty short lived. As for the pay ones, like Dell, I sort of recall reading/hearing that they really didn't get enough takers to make it worthwhile. They certainly got more vocal press from the 'it shoulda been free' crowd than the 'hey, they at least offered it,' crowd.

Maybe it isn't that tough for an individual to cook an individual ROM, but consider that a good deal of that is likely illegal. Pulling the drivers, disassembling the code and recombining are all violations of the licensing. I have no particular issue with Joe Schmuckatelly doing this, but I don't think MS could do it. I really don't think they have the legal right to grab drivers from Samsung, HTC, Motorola, etc and deliver fully functional ROM upgrades. Even for Beta tests they have had to get special permission to offer test units based on OEM hardware. Just a function of the ecosystem/process they built and are now stuck with......Until they build their own device.

[Sven Johannsen]

Well, for what it's worth, I'm going to once again pound on this issue of upgrades at this Mobius event I'm at... :)
Good luck with that. :rolleyes:

[possmann]

MS can push out upgrades all they want to but it won't mean a thing until the carrier approves and allows the upgrades to occur.

Again - there is that unique layer that HAS to disappear in order for this to be effective. Because the carrier needs to stick their finger in to everything we (the consumer) looses. Imagine if your ISP had to approve any OS patches/upgrades before you could install them on your PC or MAC? You'd go over the edge!

That is the unfortunate model that we have to live with in the smartphone world. Until the carriers get out of the way and allow the OS makers to push new and improved updates through arguing for OS updates is a wasted effort (IMHO).

[whydidnt]

MS can push out upgrades all they want to but it won't mean a thing until the carrier approves and allows the upgrades to occur.

Again - there is that unique layer that HAS to disappear in order for this to be effective. Because the carrier needs to stick their finger in to everything we (the consumer) looses. Imagine if your ISP had to approve any OS patches/upgrades before you could install them on your PC or MAC? You'd go over the edge!

That is the unfortunate model that we have to live with in the smartphone world. Until the carriers get out of the way and allow the OS makers to push new and improved updates through arguing for OS updates is a wasted effort (IMHO).
Yet, somehow, Apple manages to push updates out to it's phones every 4-6 months. Palm has pushed 3 (i think) updates to the Pre in it's short life. HTC has updated the Google G1 on T-Mobile at least twice, and another update is pending (all within a year).

It's become far too convenient for Microsoft and their OEM partners to point the finger at the carriers. Most of their competitors seem to have figured out how to work through this issue with the carriers. I suspect because they have been more motivated to.

[kiwi]

I went iPhone with the original release. I eagerly awaited the SDK and app store and am very happy right now.

When I had a WinMob phone/PDA I found it hard to get things "just to work" - ie. bluetooth connectivity, WiFi etc. How often people thought it was another blackberry? all the time!

Anyway, now that the WinMob apps are ported to the iPhone, I am happy. :cool: