Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cellphones Operating Systems

Samsung Delays Tizen Phone Launch 112

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the enlightenment-deemed-too-cool-for-you dept.
New submitter tekxtc (136198) writes Slashdot has reported in the past that a Tizen phone is coming and that the design and photos leaked. But, it has just been announced that the launch of the first Tizen phone has been delayed because of Tizen's small ecosystem. Should it ever ship? Haven't Android and iOS completely cornered the market? Is there any hope for the likes of Tizen, Firefox OS, and Windows on phones and tablets?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Samsung Delays Tizen Phone Launch

Comments Filter:
  • Yes it should ship! (Score:5, Informative)

    by houstonbofh (602064) on Monday July 28, 2014 @06:37PM (#47553631)
    Just because there is a large competitor, you do not quit. Apple didn't and came from behind several times. Now if it is not profitable, let it go, but don't just give up and give it all to App/Goog(le) without a fight. Besides, 1% of a lot of people is still a lot of people.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Dan East (318230)

      Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market. Microsoft and Blackberry had the bulk of the market share, both based on old OSes that had been stagnant for quite a while with no real innovation. Blackberry didn't even offer a touch screen device yet, and Microsoft's could hardly even be used without a stylus.

      Apple introduced revolutionary new hardware - capacitive based multitouch technology - which IMO was one of the primary reasons for the success of the iPhone. The other

      • by msauve (701917) on Monday July 28, 2014 @07:06PM (#47553809)
        "Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market. "

        Well, that's one view into the reality distortion field.
        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by gmhowell (26755)

          "Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market. "

          Well, that's one view into the reality distortion field.

          And I bet if he had said something along the lines of "Apple came from behind in the smartphone market and knocked the heretofore industry leaders on their asses", you'd have an equally useless and snarky rejoinder.

          Sometimes the inverse RDF is just as strong as the RDF itself...

        • by Ksevio (865461)
          There's a difference between creating a product and creating a market for a product. The feature-phone/smartphone market was pretty much stagnating until Apple released their iPhone, at which point it took off. Android helped, but that was a bit later.
          • by msauve (701917)
            Yeah, right. Android came later than the iPhone the same way the iPhone came after the LG Prada.

            It was when a convergence of technologies at the necessary pricepoint (capacitive touchscreens, high density color LCDs, low cost GPS chips, flash memory, higher speed cellular data, etc.) came together that the smartphone market took off - not any one vendor.
        • "Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market. " Well, that's one view into the reality distortion field.

          Both the iPod and iPhone so dramatically outclassed and outsold the existing devices in their respective categories that it seems fair to say they "created" those markets. The iPod achieved a measure of market dominance that's almost unheard of. The "MP3 player market" ceased to be something people talked about anymore, because there wasn't really a market. It was mostly just iPods. And Apple's only real competition in the smartphone market is a platform that didn't exist in the earlier market, and was spec

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by kuzb (724081)

        >Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market

        That's total bullshit. Microsoft was selling smartphones long before Apple ever was. The completely came from behind in the market.

        >Apple introduced revolutionary new hardware - capacitive based multitouch technology

        No they didn't. That already existed long before Apple came along and used it.

        Apple trying to say they invented multitouch is a complete joke, and frankly is insulting to all the other people involved. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/ [wikipedia.org]

        • by Anonymous Coward

          >.That's total bullshit. Microsoft was selling smartphones long before Apple ever was. The completely came from behind in the market.

          Didn't the PalmOS phones have touchscreens and loads of apps? They could play music, videos, take videos and pictures, run games, send email, etc.

          • by narcc (412956)

            Yes.

          • by aliquis (678370)

            I don't know whatever the iPhone had multi-touch like he claim either.

            The Nintendo DS was released November 2004 the iPhone June 2007.

            So even if you exclude the not so common devices it's not even the first casual / well spread / far reaching product using a touch screen.

            • by aliquis (678370)

              And of course there's the Palm devices (March 1997). And especially Microsoft PocketPC (Windows CE 1996) and Compaq IPAQ (launched April 2000.)

              Apple Newton February 1998.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Really? There were phones with bitmapped displays and capacitive multi-touch screens before iPhone? Please enlighten us.

          • by amiga3D (567632)

            They'd sold thousands of them. In a market counted by the millions that's very significant. Apple does that kind of crap. Take new technology that no one quite knows what to do with it, package it attractively, market it and sell the hell out of it. So yes, Apple did not invent the smartphone, just the idea that eveyone needed one.

      • Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market.

        Popularized it, perhaps, but I wouldn't say created it.

        That said, I think the GP may have been talking about the Mac.

        • Actually, the "several times" referred to the Mac after the PC killed Apple ][, and again after the Mac clones killed their own market, and the iPod, and the iPhone, and... Well, they may not be anymore "and"s now.
          • Actually, the "several times" referred to the Mac after the PC killed Apple ][, and again after the Mac clones killed their own market, and the iPod, and the iPhone, and... Well, they may not be anymore "and"s now.

            It is rare to see such a large amount of incorrect information conveyed so compactly. Kudos for your brevity, but pretty much everything here is wrong.

            The Apple ][ continued to sell well even after the introduction and subsequent success of the Mac, which itself began development before the IBM PC even existed. The original Mac wasn't really a response to IBM, famous Super Bowl commercials notwithstanding, and the Apple ]['s eventual decline was more due to success of the Mac than the PC.

            Also, Mac clones

        • by Ol Olsoc (1175323)

          Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market.

          Popularized it, perhaps, but I wouldn't say created it.

          That said, I think the GP may have been talking about the Mac.

          Some times people get the concept of inventing something crossed with creating the market for it.

          Apple did not create the smartphone. But they did make the device that created the demand for smartphones, and therefore, the market tor smartphones

    • If they just unlocked the bootloader on the rest of their phones and encouraged people to download and try Tizen on their formerly-android phones, it could grow the ecosystem fast. Just market it as a "now with no google spyware" phone, and I think many will go for it.
      • If they just unlocked the bootloader on the rest of their phones and encouraged people to download and try Tizen on their formerly-android phones, it could grow the ecosystem fast.

        Just market it as a "now with no google spyware" phone, and I think many will go for it.

        Well said. I'd plus you if I had points left.

    • by aliquis (678370)

      Also of course Windows got a chance on tablets.

      (and if they gained traction there they likely still have one on phones.)

    • by icebike (68054) on Monday July 28, 2014 @08:33PM (#47554311)

      Just because there is a large competitor, you do not quit. Apple didn't and came from behind several times. Now if it is not profitable, let it go, but don't just give up and give it all to App/Goog(le) without a fight. Besides, 1% of a lot of people is still a lot of people.

      You've totally been taken in by Samsung.
      Tizen was never meant to ship. Tizen is a threat weapon that Samsung cranks up each time Google thinks of asserting some authority
      over Android. Its simply a boogie man waiting in the wings in case Samsung doesn't get its way. It doesn't have to be viable, or even
      cost effective. All they have to do is trot it out and demonstrate something, ANYTHING once in a while.

      As long as Google plays along, Tizen will never launch.

      • Tizen is the german word for dingleberry-- those pieces of crap that cling to the hairs of your butt. I think if they ever intended to ship they might have checked that.

      • 100% this. Notice that Google announced Android Silver recently. All the sudden the head of that project gets fired, and Tizen mysteriously isn't shipping. The last time Samsung was "just about to ship", Google sold off Motorola and suddenly Samsung had delays.

        It's absolutely Samsung's way of fighting back against Google pressure.
    • Samsung is the large competitor.

      Given the fact that Samsung is the largest, arguably best manufacturer of android phones, they are litterally competing against another department in the same company.

      You have one giant South Korean buerocracy, where they have to compete within the company for the CEO/Board's attention/funding against the companies big money maker.

      Tizen is never going to ship a phone, ever.
      • Or, here's another look.

        You are a massive semiconductor manufacturer, as well as a manufacturer of smartphone handsets. You've grown your phone business to being #1 in a market segment (Android) and you're one of the few making a profit, and people are actually buying in on your marketing. You've managed to do something that very few other companies ever get done, especially in a rapidly shifting tech marketplace.

        But you are completely reliant on another company for your operating system, and they don't t

        • except in really large corporations, divisions of the company fight among themselves for the CEO's attention like other companies fight.

          Tizen will never land a smartphone, because their biggest competitor is Samsung's Android device. They might get lucky enough to release other devices, such as invehichle consoles with tizen.

          Also, since android apps won't run on Tizen, which as a new OS has a chicken and egg problem with apps, its at a major disadvantage.

          There are other large Android vendors.
    • by tlhIngan (30335)

      Just because there is a large competitor, you do not quit. Apple didn't and came from behind several times. Now if it is not profitable, let it go, but don't just give up and give it all to App/Goog(le) without a fight. Besides, 1% of a lot of people is still a lot of people.

      Heck, when the iPhone was first released, Steve Jobs himself said he didn't expect to do much to the market - if he got 1%, he would be happy.

      It's a big market.

      Then again, Samsung controls around 90% of the Android market, and probably

      • by Parts09 (1656793)

        Oh Samsung, why do we need another OS for people to develop for. What do we have now, 5 or 6 major OSes on mobile devices? Which are the 2 that have a deep ecosystem of applications? That doesn't come overnight and will kill your market share.

        I actually wrote a letter to Samsung. I am a long time Samsung supporter and advocate (bought 3 top of the line phones, a Galaxy Gear, Gear 2 and multiple top of the line tablets. Also got family and friends to switch to Samsung/Android devices. But if they don't stay

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Microsoft doesn't get it, Android is the new Windows of the phone world. Compatible & Powerful, thats it. Apple is the premium. What is Microsoft going to be??

    • by MrDoh! (71235)
      Hmm... no idea. Been watching MS in this market for years, ever since 'Pegasus' and... They just wait to see what everyone else does, throw marketing dollars at it, and try again. For the last 20 years. THIS time... I really can't get it. They've been rudderless for years, we'll see if the new guy in charge starts showing an actual direction.
    • If they're smart, they'll take everything Blackberry had and then some. There's absolutely no reason they can't produce a better email experience interfacing with Exchange than any of their competitors have. There's STILL nothing that even comes close to the old Blackberry + BES + Exchange experience 10 years later, and that's sad.
  • by Imagix (695350) on Monday July 28, 2014 @06:44PM (#47553689)
    Maybe it should, maybe it shouldn't. Why will the telcos push/carry this phone, and/or why will end-users demand this phone? Good answers to these questions will help determine whether it should be published. (And note end-users are the generic people, not the techy people. "It's more open source" isn't a good answer...)
    • by thieh (3654731)
      Well Android has some deree of hardware requirements. Which makes space in competition available in the not-so-rich places. But then again, there are used phones for that...
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 28, 2014 @06:45PM (#47553693)

    Who says there can be only two 'ecosystems' If that was true Microsoft and Apple would control everything. Then Linus Torvalds proved that 2 ecosystems was not enough and people are still spouting this nonsense.

    • Not really... Linux has basically 0 traction in the desktop market. There is OSX or Windows. OSX has basically 0 traction in the open systems server market, there is Windows or Linux. The various BSD distros have made noise every now and again from time to time, but they're an after thought, not a legitimate competitor (Solaris/FreeBSD/NetBSD/OSX/etc).
      • by dkman (863999)
        That's what they keep saying, except there are plenty of people who use Linux on the Desktop. I dual boot my laptop over to Windows less than 6 times a year (averaging once every 2 months, and I would say that's high). I generally just suspend lubuntu and hitting power prompts for my password and I'm back in session. I rarely reboot at all.

        I use Windows at work, and I have a surface pro 3 (which is still windows for the time being, but has linux in a VM). I use an android phone, i have 2 android table
  • >Haven't Android and iOS completely cornered the market?

    Yes.

    >Is there any hope for the likes of Tizen,

    No.

    >Firefox OS,

    No.

    >and Windows

    Yes.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      >>and Windows
      >
      > Yes.

          Hope of what? Of creeping up to 4% of the market, while losing MS millions in the process? MS has deep pockets, but they are not stupid. The only uncertainty is exactly when they will plug the plug.

      • by MrDoh! (71235)
        Never. They've been trying to crack this nut for nearly 20 years and still won't give it up. They can't. If someone takes aware Windows/Office, MS dies. This market should have been theirs to own, but sticking to simply bust WindowsCE rebranded with a shiny interface stopped them doing what needed to be done. Still, they can keep throwing marketing dollars at it, and as long as they creep up %'s of ownership each year, they'll see it as a success. That they're offering their services on ios/android s
    • With regard to Windows Phone you may have a point. Microsoft and Nokia have really aggressively pursued the low end of smartphones, particularly outside the USA, and have been seeing some traction in terms of devices sold.

      However, in terms of profits [fortune.com], it's pretty much Apple and Samsung [running Android]. Bleeding millions of dollars has certainly done something, but I'm not sure what Microsoft's plan for the endgame is at this point.
      • MicroNokia has been pursuing the lower end of the smartphone market using non-Windows devices (actually I think they're pursuing the higher end of the feature phone market), even coming up with their own generic Amazonesque Android phone.

        At the lower end, you don't need a Play/Appstore sized ecosystem. Just Angry Birds, Facebook and Twitter.

        • I'm pretty low end, and I don't want any of those things. What I would like is LibreOffice Base where it's possible for numeric fields to be dialable. That way I can input 1500 contacts and make & save queries that generate custom phone books for me. Other apps I actually use on my phone now are: the one to record my phone calls, text messaging, easypark, gnuchess, and Garnet, the Palm OS emulator where I have my 1500 contacts and BTZS ExpoDev.
  • All is and will be Android.
  • by mrchaotica (681592) * on Monday July 28, 2014 @06:51PM (#47553727)

    Well shit, if you're so worried about the viability of the platform that you're delaying it, then of course you're going to have a hard time attracting developers!

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers!

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Do. Or do not. There is no try.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 28, 2014 @07:06PM (#47553805)

      Never learn how do if never try. Full of shit Yoda is.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        What I meant with this (arguably crappy) citation is that if Samsung wants to try Tizen, they
          must embrace it fully, put all their weight, spends years and billions of dollars on it.

        Making an obscure handset with no application is pointless.

        It is not just about marketing. They must bet a lot, or decide to not even try.

    • Do. Or do not. There is no try.

      Yeah, spoken like someone who has never had constipation. And looking at that stew the Jedi Master cooked in his little Dagobah hut, I'm not surprised.

  • by pieterh (196118) on Monday July 28, 2014 @07:07PM (#47553815) Homepage

    Samsung never intended to release a Tizen phone. They were the ones who leaked the design and photos. The whole point of Tizen was to get a stick against Google, after they bought Motorola. Samsung are/were paranoid that Google would give Motorola preferential treatment, and that Android was becoming a toxic platform for them. Tizen was their insurance. Google got the message and Samsung killed most of their Tizen team and went back to focusing on Android.

    • by Graymalkin (13732) *

      Google got the message and Samsung killed most of their Tizen team and went back to focusing on Android.

      They killed their engineers? Can't Google just call their bluff now?

    • by caspy7 (117545)

      Samsung killed most of their Tizen team

      You'd think this would have made the news.

  • I don't care what the OS is. Just release a decently-spec'd phone with a 3.5-4 inch screen max. I'm tired of not being able to upgrade because everything from the last 3 years has been huge.
    • by wertigon (1204486)

      Sony Xperia Z Compact? It's 4.3 rather than 4 inches but other than that seems to fit your bill...

    • I found your smartphone(s). Apple's iPhone 5s is more than decently spec'ed, and it has a 4.0 inch display. Apple's iPhone 5c is very decently spec'ed -- specifications are a bit better than the iPhone 5 -- and also has a 4.0 inch display. The Blackberry Q10 also meets or exceeds your criteria. If you insist on an Android-based device then it depends on what you mean by "decently spec'ed." Possible candidates include Asus's new Zenfone 4, Sony's Xperia M, Samsung's Galaxy Ace 3 (the Ace 4 may be a downgrade
    • I used an HTC Aria for about 4 years, one of the smallest smartphones on the market. Unfortunately, it was running a heavily HTC-customized version of Android 2.1, and I hadn't successfully gotten it to upgrade to 2.2 before HTC Sync stopped working for me for a year or two, and sometime during that period Android Market got replaced by Google Play, which my phone didn't think was the same thing at all so stopped letting me install apps. And I couldn't find any other smartphone that small since then; they

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 28, 2014 @07:12PM (#47553847)

    I am tired of Google's insistence I owning and tracking everything I do, and I would be happy to leave them behind for my own privacy benefit. I have no desire to move to Apple's walled garden either. I want the flexibility to do what I want with my device, and the privacy to know that my personal data and habits are not being tracked for the purposes of trying to sell me more crap I don't want.

    Captcha: Vanities

    • If not Google, then who? Pick your poison, for you will be tracked, mined, engineered. You have little choice in the matter save for the overt actors involved.
    • by narcc (412956)

      I guess it's BlackBerry or FireFox OS for you.

      I'd call that a win anyway, but ymmv.

  • by uCallHimDrJ0NES (2546640) on Monday July 28, 2014 @07:52PM (#47554055)

    We have apparently forgotten that exclusive apps happen. If the most awesome value prop for an app in the world is on Tizen, then there will be a Tizen market.

  • by jbolden (176878) on Tuesday July 29, 2014 @12:54AM (#47555215) Homepage

    (from article) Is there any hope for the likes of Tizen, Firefox OS, and Windows on phones and tablets?

    How did Windows Phone get in that group. That's the 3rd largest ecosystem and growing rapidly with multiple billions behind it. It has shipped and is shipping. Unitwise it is over 1/3rd of of iOS sales. Definitely 3rd place but not marginal, or non-existant.

    • Re:Windows Phone? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by wertigon (1204486) on Tuesday July 29, 2014 @04:53AM (#47555729)

      Because of the Carrier boycott.

      Windows Phone will most probably never see double digit market share. The reason? Skype. Microsoft owns Skype, the single biggest threat to current carrier revenue. The Skype/VOIP revolution will happen, but if you were a carrier, would YOU invest in technology that would kill you off, long-term?

      Tomi Ahonen has a rather complete rant [blogs.com] about this topic from late 2012, and very little has changed since then.

      • by jbolden (176878)

        Except it is total fiction. Tomi made it up. Nothing like that every happened.

        http://dominiescommunicate.wor... [wordpress.com]
        http://dominiescommunicate.wor... [wordpress.com]
        http://dominiescommunicate.wor... [wordpress.com]

        • by wertigon (1204486)

          Except it isn't. Tomi has rather damning evidence in his wall of text:

          The FACT is, that Nokia CEO Stephen Elop told Nokia shareholders - and I quote - "Indeed, Microsoft did buy the Skype company as part of the ecosystem that comes with Windows Phone and Windows. The feedback from operators is they don’t like Skype, of course." Elop went on to explain why carriers/operators hate Skype " (because) it could take away from revenues."

          This is spoken by Elop himself. Why do you think Nokia fell from being t

          • by jbolden (176878)

            Tomi has rather damning evidence in his wall of text:

            Read the links. Elop never said what Tomi attributes to him. At a time when Lumia phones didn't even have Skype, Elop was asked about the operator / Microsoft relationship... There was no mention of a boycott in his response. He mentioned that among the reason those operators that were hostile to Microsoft were hostile Skype was the reason. That's it as far as facts. In terms of the companies supposedly boycotting is Verizon who spends money enhan

            • by wertigon (1204486)

              "There was a huge drop in Symbian marketshare 6 months before Elop came on as CEO. Causes cannot happen temporally before effects."

              Yes, Symbian was an aging OS that needed replacement - and there was a replacement in the works, with a clear migration path, Meego. However, at Nokia, Symbian was still alive and well, albeit the writing was on the wall. Take a look at these three pictures:

              http://communities-dominate.bl... [blogs.com]
              http://communities-dominate.bl... [blogs.com]
              http://communities-dominate.bl... [blogs.com]

              And the article in full,

              • by jbolden (176878)

                Take a look at these three pictures:.. Sales do not lie.

                No but Tomi does lie. By February 2011 Nokia's market share was down to 23.1% from the summer high of 33%. The graph is simple false. As for the picture about 1 for 1 replacement no one from Nokia has ever said that was the intent. They knew it was impossible.

                They might've lost a bit of market share, but it would have paid off quite handsomely, especially with Meego.

                MeeGo was a failed product. There was no viable path forward with MeeGo as N

                • by wertigon (1204486)

                  "MeeGo was a failed product."

                  No. The MeeGo development certainly had it's troubles not saying it hadn't, but the Nokia N9 was seen as a phone that quality-wise was even better than the iPhone. Maybe not *everyone* thought so, but, a lot of people thought so. Seriously, they compared it to a serious iPhone competitor at the time where iPhone was the gold standard. You can twist that around however you wish, fact is, getting a phone out the door good enough to rival the iPhone is a failure? I'd like to see a

                  • by jbolden (176878)

                    but the Nokia N9 was seen as a phone that quality-wise was even better than the iPhone

                    That's another Tomi myth. The N9 was a terminal product. It was buggy and architecturally flawed. Certain aspects of it got good reviews and it was a cool "what might have been phone". That's it. Moreover there was no viable path to creating an ecosystem. Contrary to Tomi's nonsense the Nokia board, Elop and the Nokia executive team are not stupid. Had the N9 been much better than the iPhone they never would have

                    • by wertigon (1204486)

                      Dude, the N9 had glowing reviews from several heavy names, that is irrefutable fact. The N9 was seen as a potential rival to iPhone, that too is irrefutable fact. And it sold like hotcakes in the few countries that released it, even with no future.

                      Moreover there was no viable path to creating an ecosystem.

                      Because Elop had killed any chances of it once the N9 hit the ground, yes? It still outsold Lumias once it was released, though.

                      I gave you details from Kanter. We're done. You obviously have no respect for

                    • by jbolden (176878)

                      . And it sold like hotcakes in the few countries that released it, even with no future.

                      No it didn't. It sold pretty well around the kinds of numbers one saw with Lumia. Go back and take a look at the figures.

                      Because Elop had killed any chances of it once the N9 hit the ground, yes?

                      No. This was all pre-Elop. The Symbian migration components and the modern interface components didn't work together. There were essentially two operating systems that they were trying to merge and were floundering. The

                    • by wertigon (1204486)

                      First, if we're talking about getting to the "third Ecosystem" as a measurement of success, then you would need at least 10% of the market. WP is not gaining market share - it is slowly losing it. There are two ways one can gain those kind of numbers, now;

                      1. Someone creates a consumer phone that is an order of magnitude better than what we have today, extremely well polished, and not based on Android/iOS. Since the bar has been raised ridiculously high the chances of that happening are very slim. Or to put

                    • by jbolden (176878)

                      Second, the way Tomi compares the smartphone sales numbers seems legit to me. He takes all smartphone unit sales

                      No he doesn't. This was a much more serious problem about 18 months back. He excluded huge Symbian sales when the phone was sold without the intent to install many apps (the Asha line) so that Elop's numbers looked worse while including many of the Chinese Androids that are unable to install apps. He most certainly does not do that.

                      The carriers in the USA are not threatened by Android hegemon

                    • by wertigon (1204486)

                      If the carriers in the US are not afraid of the coming Android hegemony, then they should be. The rest of the world already is - they've seen that the iPhone and iPod is heading the same way as the Macintosh two decades earlier did. Apple is repeating the same mistakes it did then. Apple will therefore slowly sink below 10% marketshare, just as the WinPhone is now.

                      And regardless whether you choose to trust an expert with a most impressive track record when it comes to predicting the WinPhone market, well...

                    • by jbolden (176878)

                      In the USA among postpay customers Apple marketshare is over 70%. They don't care about global marketshare and they shouldn't care about global marketshare.

    • How did Windows Phone get in that group. That's the 3rd largest ecosystem and growing rapidly with multiple billions behind it. It has shipped and is shipping. Unitwise it is over 1/3rd of of iOS sales. Definitely 3rd place but not marginal, or non-existant.

      Are they "growing rapidly" in any developed market like the USA, Canada, EU, Japan, Australia, New Zealand? The only person I know who has one lives in Taiwan and she admitted to me she bought it for cost reasons but would have preferred an Android or iPhone. And billions of what, exactly, behind it? If you mean sales then that is certainly not true. If you mean Microsoft is throwing billions of dollars at trying to get suckers to buy them, maybe. They don't even advertise Windows Phone on TV any more

      • by jbolden (176878)

        Are they "growing rapidly" in any developed market like the USA, Canada, EU, Japan, Australia, New Zealand?

        Yes.
        France 10.5% latest figures up from 1.9% two years ago
        Japan 0% to 1.4% 2 year
        UK 4.1% to 9.1% 2 year
        etc...

        They don't even advertise Windows Phone on TV any more in the USA and at least a few years ago they were doing that.

        Nokia has reduced their push in the USA market. The USA market is too different than their model, for structural reasons. Obviously the USA is important to Microsoft so I'd

  • posting to undo mistaken mod

  • by Anonymous Coward

    The Jolla [jolla.com] from Finnish ex-Nokia people has already released a phone with the GNU/Linux-based Sailfish OS, which _also_ (after installing a proprietary Dalvik engine from Myriad) can run Android applications really well.

    So there's already a contender out there.

"Marriage is like a cage; one sees the birds outside desperate to get in, and those inside desperate to get out." -- Montaigne

Working...