Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cellphones Handhelds Microsoft Operating Systems Windows

Microsoft Reportedly Seeks To Put Windows Phone On Android Devices 182

Posted by timothy
from the one-way-or-another dept.
quantr draws your attention to a Bloomberg report that Microsoft has reached out to HTC to see if the company would be interested in adding Windows as a second OS to its Android handsets. From the Bloomberg story: "Its willingness to add Windows as a second operating system underscores the lengths to which Microsoft will go to get manufacturers to carry its software. HTC, the first company to make both Windows and Android phones, hasn’t unveiled a new Windows-based handset since June and has no current plans to release any more, said one person. Microsoft, with 3.7 percent of the market, is finding it necessary to make concessions after agreeing to acquire Nokia Oyj’s handset unit, which competes with other smartphone makers. [Microsoft operating systems head Terry] Myerson was planning to visit Asia this month and meet with senior executives at Taoyuan, Taiwan-based HTC to discuss his proposal, one of the people said."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Reportedly Seeks To Put Windows Phone On Android Devices

Comments Filter:
  • Wrong way round. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 05, 2013 @03:15PM (#45046221)

    Android on Lumia, that'd be an offering.

    • Re:Wrong way round. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Samantha Wright (1324923) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @03:27PM (#45046307) Homepage Journal
      Funny you should mention that. Guess what Nokia was doing before Elop showed up [zdnet.com]?
      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        According to a few inside accounts, Elop originally wanted to have Android on Nokia phones. When Elop visited Google's HQ, he was rather surprised how hostile Google was to him. Google was willing to give a decent licensing fee if Nokia used the stock Android firmware but were charging hand and leg if Nokia were to add their own features to the device. According to rumors, Google was being complete jerks about it too.

        When we heard about that account, we all assumed that Elop's "burning platform" was Symbian

        • Re:Wrong way round. (Score:5, Informative)

          by tibman (623933) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @04:03PM (#45046521) Homepage

          You are incredibly misinformed. It costs nothing to put android on a phone (even for a phone manufacturer). The manufacturer has to get a license to put the play store on the device, but that is about compliance. If nokia wanted to do their own thing then they wouldn't have had to spend a penny or ask anyone's permission. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)#Licensing [wikipedia.org]

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward

            Except for this part:

            Even though the software is open-source, device manufacturers cannot use Google's Android trademark unless Google certifies that the device complies with their Compatibility Definition Document (CDD). Devices must also meet this definition to be eligible to license Google's closed-source applications, including Google Play.

            Google doesn't certify your phone if you put in new features it doesn't like. You can make a phone that can run Android apps (like BB10) without paying a dime, but you can't call it an Android Phone unless Google approves of it.

            • by Shompol (1690084) on Sunday October 06, 2013 @12:42AM (#45048977)
              Nokia used to be such a big player in the mobile market that they did not need to become "yet another Android vendor". They had the know-how, capital, fame, and few billions of loyal customers to either come up with a competing OS (MeeGo) or just fork Android and not give a flying fuck about Google trademark. They even had Nokia-built map and navigation good enough to rival Google's.
              • Nokia used to be such a big player in the mobile market that they did not need to become "yet another Android vendor". They had the know-how, capital, fame, and few billions of loyal customers to either come up with a competing OS (MeeGo) or just fork Android and not give a flying fuck about Google trademark. They even had Nokia-built map and navigation good enough to rival Google's.

                By resting on its laurels and past fame (like Motorola did), Nokia ended up the way it did (like Motorola did.) It should have given a fuck about Android (or even gone Windows Phone). But it didn't, so, all that remains for it now is to indulge in past glories while circling down the drain.

          • by larwe (858929)
            That's only technically true. It costs a lot of resource-hours (=money) to port and qualify Android onto a phone platform, and to get it carrier approved. The carrier approval processes are Byzantine and expensive beyond belief.
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by Anonymous Coward

              Carrier approval is utterly irrelevant except in North America where you have corporations making the laws. Anywhere else people can just buy a phone and use it.

              Now obviously the North American market is a good place because it's full of suckers who will cheerfully pay you $50 per month for two years to buy a $500 phone, but it's not necessary. If you can't recoup the cost of deliberately arcane "Carrier approval" processes from the money those suckers will pay you then you simply don't sell into America.

              • by Holi (250190)

                Huh? Carrier approval is about getting a new device certified on the networks. It has to be done in Europe too. It has nothing to do about buying a phone and carrier subsidies.

                • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

                  by Anonymous Coward

                  Nope. That's FCC approval.

            • by tibman (623933)

              I totally agree with development costs. If HTC wanted to make an android phone, they'd likely have to use parts that already have linux drivers or they'd have to pay a team to write them. But i feel like i should also point out that this benefits everyone. Open source drivers are a big thing. I don't think you can use this as a point against android though. No matter what the OS was, they'd have to get drivers to interface with the phone hardware. But i completely agree that there are costs involved w

            • Actually you'd be surprised how easy it can be especially in this day and age where most of the IP blocks are largely the same and most are supported. I used to do 50-50 embedded linux and embedded windows work and back when I did a lot of windows I could do a bring up from bare hardware and a linux port to booting into a windows GUI (windows mobile if required) in a day or maybe two if lucky. I'm not even a slight ms fanboy but the embedded windows architecture is quite clever in the way that the HAL abst

          • by CODiNE (27417)

            Good luck running popular apps without the Play Store services running on the phone. To get the full android experience you have to pay the license and have Play on it. You'd be surprised how much functionality is in the play store service and not the OS.

        • Re:Wrong way round. (Score:4, Interesting)

          by gl4ss (559668) on Sunday October 06, 2013 @03:44AM (#45049421) Homepage Journal

          huh who the f modded this up?

          funny insiders you have.

          now what elop did was say that nokia had looked into android and COULD NOT CUSTOMIZE IT ENOUGH for their needs so they had to partner with MS. seriously. that's what he claimed as one reason. that with android they couldn't differentiate enough so they went with an os that in all practicality can't get any customizations and a phone platform where they could not even choose which soc providers to use!

          now if you don't see the bullshit in that then you're kind of hopeless and I have a bridge to sell for you and an investment opportunity in a potentially multinational ladder business.

          (that is to say that nokia had insiders working for them who on purpose were to find reasons not to use android, including elop. nokia was so dysfunctional at that point though that they would have on purpose looked for reasons not to use android even without elop. but this was back when elop bothered to even keep up a charade about what's going on)

    • by kthreadd (1558445)

      I don't care personally what OS the computer (which some people call phone for no good reason) originally came with. I want to be able to swap it at will. But this is not the case for some reason. Hardware should not be locked down just because the computer is called a phone. It's a computer and you as the user should be able to do what you want with it. This doesn't of course mean that a company like Apple has to support this, but they should at least not actively prevent it like they do now by locking dow

      • by larwe (858929)
        I agree in principle, but it's really not that simple. There are carrier approval issues - these have nothing to do with the phone vendor, they're inserted by AT&T et al. Common, obvious example: AT&T doesn't want you sharing your monthly data allotment between devices unless you sign up for a freakin' expensive shared data plan. So they don't want firmware on your phone that will allow tethering without checking to see if your account has the magic "this guy is allowing us to assrape his credit car
      • by schnell (163007)

        I don't care personally what OS the computer (which some people call phone for no good reason)

        Because it makes phone calls and that's what 90% of users use it for at least in part?

        It's a computer and you as the user should be able to do what you want with it.

        Agreed, absolutely! You did buy it for full price like you buy a computer, right? If you did, then you are 100% correct. Did you buy it for several hundred dollars less than the true cost because you agreed to use it under a carrier's terms and conditions for a fixed period of time? Then you are getting what you paid for.

        • by kthreadd (1558445)

          Because it makes phone calls and that's what 90% of users use it for at least in part?

          It's certainly one of the features, but I think it's clear that won't be the case as more and more general computing moves to mobile.

          Agreed, absolutely! You did buy it for full price like you buy a computer, right? If you did, then you are 100% correct. Did you buy it for several hundred dollars less than the true cost because you agreed to use it under a carrier's terms and conditions for a fixed period of time? Then you are getting what you paid for.

          That's exactly what I did. Carriers don't have that type of control where I live and hardware is therefore usually available at full retail price. The last phone I bought cost me roughly $1100 with current exchange rates.

    • by xeoron (639412)
      Microsoft's Linux Distro: Windows Phone Linux
  • by wjh31 (1372867) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @03:16PM (#45046229) Homepage
    To be able to have the choice of OS on your device is a good thing, maybe you like the S3 but like windows OS. or you like the nokia lumia hardware but prefer andoid. Now its never going to be allowed to happen with iphone/iOS but choice of OS on other devices can only be a good thing
    • by sycodon (149926) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @03:29PM (#45046329)

      IBM has contacted Apple to see if they want to put MVS on the iPhone, complete with a punched card interface.

    • by girlintraining (1395911) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @03:42PM (#45046395)

      choice of OS on other devices can only be a good thing

      BAD OR MISSING NTLDR. CANNOT CALL 911.

      Abort/retry/ignore? _

    • You can already get what is basically the Galaxy S3 with Windows Phone, its called the Samsung Ativ S. I think Samsung makes it as a concession to Microsoft, as they seem to sell very few of them. I would love to see smartphones become more PC-like, with multiple OSs available on each model and more hardware standardization, so custom ROMs become simpler.

      I'm pretty sure Microsoft means this as a one-way-street, though, don't expect to see a Lumia running Android any time soon. Too bad, the Lumia product

      • by cbhacking (979169)

        Amusingly enough, the ATIV S was also the first WP8 device to have its security cracked open; an "interop-unlock" hack (not quite root, but much closer than before) is available for it, but not for any other non-Samsung WP8 handset at this time.

    • Actually, they should outright reject it as it is Microsoft's policy to not permit dual boot PC's to be sold. Until I can go into Best Buy and pick up a Windows7/Linux Mint machine, the phone industry should adopt Microsoft's own policy of Single OS only. They should understand this policy well. They created it and enforced it heavily with legal action. Remember the DOS alternatives and attempts at giving the customer a choice? Windows as a second OS? are you crazy for even suggesting it?

  • by larwe (858929) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @03:21PM (#45046267) Homepage
    Microsoft has played games with numbers to pump its supposed Windows market share many many times. For instance, if you're a big corporation and you buy 10,000 machines with Vista installed, but backlevel them to XP, Microsoft counted those as Vista sales. This "dual boot" bullshit is almost certainly the same nonsense. HTC has a bigger market share by itself than all the Windows Phone devices in aggregate (I believe). Anyway, it's the #3 smartphone vendor behind Apple and Samsung. It's also in really dire trouble financially, or at least so the news-sphere seems to indicate. So, they're hurting for cash and might be willing to accept some cash to load Windows on their Android phones as dual boot. Practically nobody will use Windows, but Microsoft will be able to claim those dual boot handset sales as "Windows sales" and fake the numbers to make it look like Win Phone is growing in marketshare.
    • by Billly Gates (198444) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @03:44PM (#45046405) Journal

      I would be interested. I get real Onenote support and better integration for exchange at work. On the weekends its android time. Metro may suck on a big computer screen but is fine for cell phones.

      The Windows kernel is lighter than linux and snappy too.

      • The Windows kernel is lighter than linux and snappy too.

        Linky?

      • by Threni (635302)

        > The Windows kernel is lighter than linux and snappy too.

        Smaller? Faster? Giggles... Uh.. I mean "citation needed".

        Actually, smaller's not that important as clearly Linux has a rather successful footprint. Is "snappy" a way of saying "fast, but not faster than linux"? Being smaller but unsuccessful isn't really anything to shout about.

        • Sadly, it wouldn't be all that hard for Microsoft to make the UI on Windows Phone 'snappier' than the UI on Android, due to some incredibly shortsighted design decisions that were made early in Android's design. They bent over backwards to make sure Android apps written for 320x480 could limp along on a 160x240 display, while completely IGNORING the use case that everybody ended up caring about (the rapid leap to 1280x720/800, and 1920x1080/1200 displays).Simply put, Android's rendering system doesn't scale

      • by Nerdfest (867930)

        The problem that needs to be solved is closed products like Exchange. Sorry, but trying to get better integration with products like that at the cost of the ability to use other operating systems is a very bad idea.

      • I would be interested. I get real Onenote support and better integration for exchange at work. On the weekends its android time. Metro may suck on a big computer screen but is fine for cell phones.

        The Windows kernel is lighter than linux and snappy too.

        Odd ... but at least one cloud provider has a minimum Windows image of 2G memory, as compared to Linux mininum .5G. Not sure what is meant by "lighter", but I don't see it from a resource utilization standpoint.

    • Just what we need. Another microsoft tax. It's already hard enough for me to buy a decent laptop without paying licensing for a windows OS that I'll never use, now this is going to start happening to phones as well?

      No thanks.
      • by larwe (858929)
        Heh. Yeah, I hear that. Do you remember the days when computers used to be loaded with a dual OS choice of Windows for Workgroups 3.11 and Windows 95? You had a onetime choice at boot, and the unused operating system got deleted. I hope at least the dual boot Android/Windows phones do the same - so the gigabytes of unwanted Windows crap get deleted when you pick Android at power up. Of course, they won't...
    • Well, they could pump the numbers by including a Windows Phone software license with every Windows 8 license sold for PCs. So if you buy a new laptop with Windows 8 pre-installed, and later decide to buy a Windows Phone device, you don't have to buy the Windows Phone software license . . .

      . . . or they could couple the Windows 8 PC license with a Windows Phone device, so if you want to use Windows 8 on your PC, then you have to buy a Windows Phone device . . . but wait, there's still more . . .

      You get a

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Oh, if only the license terms for Android FORBID dual booting, and allowing the user to make such a choice.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/02/20/be_inc_sues_microsoft/

  • Trust Microsoft??? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jonsmirl (114798) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @03:30PM (#45046335) Homepage

    My memory is fuzzy on this, but I believe Microsoft took Toshiba to court and made them stop dual booting Linux on their laptops about 20 years ago. At the time Toshiba owned a Linux distribution so they prevented Toshiba from shipping their own code.

    This is the same Microsoft that is extorting everyone over unnamed Android patent infringements.

    Why would you want to work with them? Every company that works with them ends up dead or wounded.

    • by jonsmirl (114798)

      Just for fun Google should put those exact licensing terms Microsoft used against Toshiba into their Android license.

    • by larwe (858929)
      You know, I totally forgot about the Microsoft "we own critical Android patents" moneysucking. Lest we forget, Microsoft has (according to external analysis) earned more money from royalties on those patents, as shipped in Android devices, than they have on WinMo licenses. Anyway - the very simplest move Microsoft could make here is to tell all the vendors "make Win Phone a dual boot option, at no cost and the Android patents are free". Presto, massive free expansion of the number of devices with Win Phone
      • by jonsmirl (114798)

        They need the subsidize the extra 32GB of flash needed to hold Windows Phone too.

        Then we can delete WIndows Phone and use the 32GB flash.

        • by larwe (858929)
          Given the history MS has of pouring marketing dollars down the toilet, this is actually totally believable as something that might happen.
  • by 93 Escort Wagon (326346) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @03:37PM (#45046373)

    HTC has had trouble getting traction against Samsung despite offering compelling hardware. Offering a dual-boot phone might give them a competitive advantage with some subset of buyers... although I'm guessing it'd be a fairly small number.

    • by chowdahhead (1618447) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @03:51PM (#45046453)
      Collaborating with Microsoft has historically been the kiss of death, however. I just don't see anything helpful coming out of that--there's certainly no consumer interest in WP and any capital injection would be a short term band-aid. HTC needs to narrowly focus their product line, not target every market segment like Samsung, and build brand recognition. Their hardware is good and their software support has greatly improved. They just need their name and logo out there more, and in a way that people associate with smartphones.
      • by Voyager529 (1363959) <voyager529@yahMENCKENoo.com minus author> on Saturday October 05, 2013 @06:17PM (#45047257)

        I just don't see anything helpful coming out of that-

        For a site dedicated to nerds, there's an utter dearth of imagination...and memory.

        See kids, back in the day, HTC made this little phone called the HD2. It shipped with Windows Mobile 6.5 and was intended to ship with Windows 7, but Microsoft told them "no can do" for the sole reason that it has an inconsistent hardware button configuration with the rest of the Windows Phone 7 handsets. However, because of the intended dual-OS compatibility, HTC released a phone that was impressively consistent and relatively easy to flash. This lead to the development of MAGLDR and CLK, which were alternative bootloaders that enabled users to flash Windows Phone 7 (unofficially, though completely functionally if you can get MS to give you a product key), Android (more versions of Android than any other handset; everything from Froyo to Jellybean and I think some of the earlier versions were available, too), Meego, Ubuntu, FirefoxOS, and proof-of-concept compatibility with WP8 and WinRT. To this day, it has one of the most active communities on XDA, certainly moreso than any other phone that was sold during the same time period.

        When HTC builds a phone to boot a pair of OSes, especially ones as different as Windows Phone and Android, odds are better than ever that HTC will end up shipping a phone that's more mod-friendly than most of the phones that ship with just one OS, even a Nexus. Don't you think that there's something "helpful" about a phone that is sufficiently hackable that it can have its software kept current long past its EOL date according to the carrier? I do.

        While we're at it, I know that hating Microsoft is cool around here and all, and yes, I do walk around with an Android phone because a phone without a user-exposed file system is a dealbreaker for me, but are we seriously going to sit here and say that it's better for Google/Samsung and Apple to each have ~50% of the market rather than having Google/Samsung/HTC, Microsoft/Nokia/HTC, and Apple all having ~33% of the market a piece? I always thought competition was a positive situation, and even if HTC gets screwed over by Microsoft somehow (like they did by not being able to officially software upgrade the HD2), it still means more mod-friendly phones for everyone - something I thought that a group of people who like installing Linux on everything with a processor would appreciate.

    • by Miamicanes (730264) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @07:48PM (#45047763)

      > HTC has had trouble getting traction against Samsung despite offering compelling hardware.

      Interestingly, HTC's plummeting market share coincided almost EXACTLY with their elimination of removable batteries and microSD cards. It's not rocket science. Two years ago, HTC was neck in neck with Samsung. Then, they eliminated microSD and removable batteries, everybody who viewed that as intolerable & used to have a HTC phone bought Samsung phones when it was time for their next upgrade, and HTC went from being "a little behind Samsung" to "WAY behind Samsung".

      Suggestion to HTC: give us a new phone like the Evo3D (but with GSM+LTE capabilities compatible with AT&T and T-Mobile as well) that has microSD and a removable battery (or at least a 6,000mAH battery if it MUST be non-removable) and an unlocked (or trivially-unlockable) bootloader, and watch your market share climb again. I know people (like my brother) who literally paid a small fortune to buy a USED Evo 3D long after it was officially EOL'ed because their original one got destroyed and they liked the 3D features so much. My brother STILL resists buying a new phone, because he doesn't want to give up the 3D camera and display.

      • by sir-gold (949031)

        I have owned a T-Mobile G2 (HTC Desire Z) for the last 3 years, and I would love for HTC to come out with a similar phone with more modern hardware (I have mine rooted, running android 4.2, and its starting to show it's age)

        I don't understand why nobody makes android phones with physical keyboards anymore. I'm ready for a new phone, but I don't want to give up my keyboard

    • by Solandri (704621)
      HTC is the low-hanging fruilt. Both Apple and Microsoft have been throwing their weight around to force HTC into unfavorable agreements. That's why they're having trouble getting traction against Samsung. Microsoft isn't HTC's savior, they're the ones who helped put HTC in the poor market position they're currently in. Microsoft asking HTC to make Windows Phone phones is akin to the bully who steals your lunch money asking you to also do his homework for him.
  • by Billly Gates (198444) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @03:39PM (#45046383) Journal

    So instead of OEMS only caring about Windows, designing hardware only tested for Windows, only supporting Windows, signing Windows in the hardware boot device,and even including Windows where someone has to manually go into the bios and install a second bootloader to run Linux has now changed to carriers only caring about linux, designing phones just for linux/Android, only supporting Linux, and even signing linux to run Android on top, now has to listen to an angry MS who feels its soo unfair that no one will even stock their products on the shelf nor care and are begging just for the opportunity to dual boot! ... No cost too as well according to NEOwin!

    Wow. Couldnt happen to a nicer company. It is amazing how fast this happened. Windows CE was gearing up for a monopoly and beating blackberry just a few years ago to. ... well this?

    • by larwe (858929)
      Waiiit... Apart from in one of Ballmer's wet dreams, when on earth was WinCE (or its descendants) ever en route towards monopoly status?
      • by SEE (7681)

        Apart from in one of Ballmer's wet dreams, when on earth was WinCE (or its descendants) ever en route towards monopoly status?

        In 2004, Windows Mobile (CE) had 11% market share in "smartphones". In 2005, this increased to 17%. In 2006, it moved up to 37% (tied with Blackberry, well ahead of Palm's 17% and Symbian's 9%), and in 2007, it hit 42% (while Blackberry lost share).

        That flattening of the growth of Windows Mobile marketshare in 2007 may have been inevitable . . . but it may have been the iPhone. No

  • "Its willingness to add Windows as a second operating system underscores the lengths to which Microsoft will go to get manufacturers to carry its software.

    Now that they have underscored lengths, will that... er... um... what?

    willingness to add... underscores... to which ... will go... to get ... to carry

    For the advanced student: Parse this into the canonical <subj><verb><predicate> form. 10 points.

    HTC, the first company to make both Windows and Android phones, hasn’t unveiled a new Windows-based handset since June and has no current plans to release any more, said one person.

    Which person is that?

    Microsoft, with 3.7 percent of the market, is finding it necessary to make concessions after agreeing to acquire Nokia Oyj’s handset unit, which competes with other smartphone makers.

    Apropos of nothing, which of these is the main verb?

    Myerson was planning to visit Asia this month and meet with senior executives at Taoyuan, Taiwan-based HTC to discuss his proposal, one of the people said."

    This is Bloomberg, right? Are they supposed to be good at writing?

  • This is the why it is supposed to be. People should be free to install whatever operating system they want on their phones like they do their PCs.

    Sooner all this proprietary / OS imaging for specific devices garbage ends the better for everyone.

  • by Gravis Zero (934156) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @04:59PM (#45046887)

    if you are going to run Windows Phone, you damn well better accept that MS and the NSA will have full access to everything on your phone and will set it to record all your conversations.

    this used to be tinfoil hat area but now it's a probability.

  • Will I get a longer battery life from using Android or using Windows Phone?

    seems like something worth knowing.

  • Windows Mobile is the Zune of wireless technology. Who would want to junk up perfectly good storage space on a mobile device with windows?

    Quit trying to make Windows Mobile happen, it's not happening.

  • If you could share all data between the two OSs without any extra work: pictures, movies, contacts, calendar, etc... If all of that synced between the two that might be interesting. If that is not possible, then I don't see how the proposition makes the slightest bit of sense for an end user. Assuming both would be used on occasion, it would be a confusing mess.

    It might be interesting, but not for me. A friend of mine works for a carrier so I get to demo and thoroughly play with all the phones and I can co
  • A free "Windows Phone App"

    I would like that.

    Any other thing (Dual-Boot, Choice at start-up, something else messe up, additional cost): Dont like that

  • by The Cisco Kid (31490) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @07:17PM (#45047613)

    Desperation, I think.

    The king of "You must sell windows with every device, you may not offer other options" is now begging, with its tail between its legs, to an "other option" on a device.

    "No thanks".

  • by Jason Levine (196982) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @09:32PM (#45048277)

    The problem with having a dual boot phone is that phones typically have limited storage space. If you want to dual boot a PC with Linux and Windows, you can stick in another hard drive to add a terabyte or two more storage. Phones, on the other hand, only have a small amount of space. My phone (a Droid Bionic) has 16GB of storage. It's a bit old, though. Newer phones come with at least 32GB of storage. Of this, some is allocated for the OS.

    If you want to have two operating systems on the same phone you have two options:

    1) Have the user storage area (for apps, photos, videos, etc) be smaller. Some people will buy your phone because "it runs Windows AND Android" but word will quickly spread about the fact that this means you can't install as many apps or take as many photos as a normal Android only phone (or Windows only phone for that matter).

    2) Add more memory to the phone. This will allow you to compensate for the second operating system, but it will also raise the price of the phone. Users will need to decide whether the increased cost is really worth it.

    Yes, you can use MicroSD cards to increase the space, but that's an added cost to the user. Telling the user that they just bought this more expensive dual-boot phone and now they need to buy another card to get the same user-storage space as that person who bought the cheaper single-OS phone is a losing proposition.

    • by Jeremi (14640)

      You forgot option (3) -- as soon as the user chooses an OS to boot into, that OS auto-deletes the other OS to free up more user-space. I think this might be what Microsoft is going for ;^)

  • by Peter H.S. (38077) on Saturday October 05, 2013 @11:48PM (#45048769) Homepage

    Why would MS have any interest in a dual booting phone? I find it more likely that MS is begging HTC to still make Windows phones and are trying to make this more attractive by suspending demand for the mandatory 17 Windows buttons or whatever they usually demand to certify the hardware.
    That way HTC can use exactly the same hardware for both their Android and Windows version, thereby reducing their development costs.

    MS probably have to sweetening the deal by making their OS free for HTC to use too.

    It is difficult to understand why any phone company would still want to make windows phones now that MS now are competing directly against them with their own large ex-Nokia production line. Yes, for sure, MS is no longer a software only company.

    Nokia already sold their Windows phones with a hefty loss, so now MS either have to raise prices as to not out-compete other Windows phone makers (not going to happen), or compete for market share by dumping prices, thereby out-competing other Windows phone makers like HTC, or dump prices and compensate anyone desperate enough to still make Windows phones.

  • You can read about it here:
    www.sprysoftware.com

    It's a better solution because
    - You DON'T need a Windows license
    - It's smaller: You can run more apps with less memory

  • As someone who has owned both Windows Phone and Android, bad idea for HTC. Yeah, WP looks cool, but that is about where it stops. I can customize the hell out of my Android, different launchers, different lockers, different dialers, different SMS apps, different search applications, etc. I can make my Android look and act like WP, I can make my Android look and act like iOS, I can make my Android look and act like Ubuntu Touch, I can even install a complete linux distribution inside my Android phone. There

When in doubt, mumble; when in trouble, delegate; when in charge, ponder. -- James H. Boren

Working...