Speculating On What a Microsoft Superphone Might Mean 371
smitty777 writes "Forbes is running an intriguing story on a new 'Superphone' under development by the folks at Microsoft. According to this leaked MS roadmap document, the plan is to build the Apollo-based phone in the 4th quarter of 2012. FTA: 'In the end, however, none of this matters. Microsoft's "peek into the future" is barely a glimpse into what the company may or may not have planned for 2012. While the "superphone" bullet is worth noting, it is not the confirmation of a revolutionary new product. At best, it indicates that Microsoft wishes to compete with Apple by offering a product that is, well, super.' It's also interesting that Sony and AT&T also appear to be working on superphones of their own."
Re:Easily explainable: Nokia (Score:5, Insightful)
Winphone 7 isn't *that* good.
However ... It's a good start considering they wiped the Windows CE slate clean and implemented XNA and Silverlight on a decent minimum-specced hardware base.
It's still *very* immature, considering the polish of its competitors.
Re:Easily explainable: Nokia (Score:5, Insightful)
Nice astroturf. Too bad it hasn't much to do with TFA, but then again neither does the summary. Which can be be summarized as
How exciting.
(Sarcasm in the TFA)
It's a hyperbolic expansion of a marketing blurb that in essence, means absolutely nothing except to perhaps cement "superphone" as the next idiotic buzzword in this segment.
Microsoft's corporate culture = mediocrity. (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft reminds me of General Motors.
The capability of both companies is immense, yet due to various internal
influences, both companies have an overwhelming tendency to produce
things which are mediocre at best and outright repulsive when compared
to alternative choices, this with distressing regularity.
Microsoft could produce an amazing phone, but it will suck in ways which
matter to smart users, who won't want to use it, much less buy it. Just
wait and see.
All Microssoft Phones are super in their own way (Score:5, Insightful)
I dont think there's been a single other player out there who can stand to compete against Microsoft in it's ability to generate huge amounts of press and fanfare in unreleased products that ultimately become unparalleled market failures.
Frankly, Microsoft would do well to take a note from Apple's playbook and SHUT THE FUCK UP about the product until it's release instead of blathering like a spastic child about it's vaporware, leaking feature after feature and allowing the competition to catch up or even surpass it's abilities before the product is even launched.
What a Microsoft Superphone Might Mean (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Easily explainable: Nokia (Score:4, Insightful)
One word:
Astroturf.
Re:Easily explainable: Nokia (Score:0, Insightful)
Translation: "I hate microsoft so everyone must hate them too"
Or the alternative one "Cmon.. look at his post.. you really think someone can have that opinion? People are supposed to hate microsoft !"
Re:No Monopoly, No Success (Score:4, Insightful)
You start with a monopoly by making a deal with IBM as it introduces its first PC, requiring all IBM PCs to run your OS (but letting you license your OS to any competitor to IBM that might arise). I don't know how you missed that - it's pretty common knowledge. In fact it was a Supreme Court decision, if there were any doubt.
MSVC tools and .NET are extensions of the MS monopoly.
SQL Server gained its market share by making a deal similar to the IBM one with Sybase, though MS in that case literally copied Sybase and then used its business SW monopoly to kill first Sybase, then nearly all its other competitors. SQL Server is an interesting example, because it has gained market share not only through its business SW monopoly, but extended that monopoly through actual innovation and quality. But also through the synergy with its business SW monopoly and its developer market share that it gained through that monopoly.
The rest of what you say about MS is true. It's a symptom of its monopoly advantages. In fact MS benefits from sitting on good developers, even if it doesn't get better products from them, by denying them to the competition. More monopoly strategies.
The main problem with Microsoft is that they have abused their monopoly power to clog the innovation with anti-competitive software and market strategies for decades. Their crap software dominating through monopoly and other unfair competition is deadweight that has divided and slowed personal technology, and saddled it with all kinds of legacies that benefit no one but Microsoft.
Re:Easily explainable: Nokia (Score:3, Insightful)
\When i had to root and install a cooked rom just to get the camera to take more than 2 pictures in a row, there is a problem.
Yes, there is. Return your phone to the manufacturer and get a brand new one for free. No need to flash your ROM to take two pictures without crashing.
Re:Easily explainable: Nokia (Score:4, Insightful)
We could go on forever, however, riddle me this:
When you perused the headline, then the summary...did you have any *inkling* whatsoever, that InterestingFella would have the first post? That it would have the same timestamp as the submission? (ya, it's Firehose! yep, Firehose!). That, despite having the same timestamp, the spelling/grammar is usually good; that the thoughts seem pretty-well laid out, embedded links, sales info? Cursory competitor bash? Shall I continue?
Of course you did. If it's not frosty piss, it's this weeks incarnation of the same dude.
ergo...obvious.
How many accounts does one have to have on this site, anyway?
cheers
4Q 2012? Who will care? (Score:4, Insightful)
The phone market is done and dusted. People have increasing investment (in money and in time spent learning to use) a collection of applications, and the market for "dumb phone to smart phone" transition is finished. The only market left is competing head-on to switch people away from iPhone (good luck with that) or from Android (fractionally easier, as there's evidence people can be switch to Apple).
In order to compete, Microsoft would either have to completely kill Apple stone-dead in functionality and quality, with a release one product going against a mature product with a mature eco-system (didn't Zune teach them _anything_?) or would have to undercut the commodity Android vendors on price, which is essentially impossible now, never mind in a year's time.
Microsoft are increasing slow to react, and are arriving both late and under-armed at every fight. Music Player, Smart Phone, Tablet: they've missed all three. They need to find a new place to innovate, and for as long as they refuse to do anything which isn't based around Windows, that's going to get harder and harder for them.
Re:Super (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Easily explainable: Nokia (Score:5, Insightful)
XNA doesn't matter. What matters is how easy it is for the developers who have already written apps for iOS and Android to port them to WP7. Microsoft is trying to apply their usual MO to a market where they have no market power
Hey, I would you introduce you to these two small guys called Windows and Xbox360.
Re:Too late. (Score:4, Insightful)
They're a distant third these days.
How does this myth persist? Blackberry, Symbian, and even Bada outsell and have a higher marketshare than windows phone. They might be third in marketing and fanboys but they damn sure aren't third in sales.