Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Microsoft Businesses Cellphones Handhelds Hardware

The Reason a Surface Phone Won't Fix Microsoft's Mobile Problem (windows10update.com) 154

Ammalgam writes: Microsoft's CMO recently admitted that Microsoft was behind in the mobile arena and needed time to build a competitive phone. In the Windows community however, some feel that the Windows Phone platform is out of time. On Windows10Update.com, the author discusses some of the reasons why a "Surface Phone" might not be enough to fundamentally change public perception about Microsoft mobile phones.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Reason a Surface Phone Won't Fix Microsoft's Mobile Problem

Comments Filter:
  • Huh? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by BradleyUffner ( 103496 ) on Monday December 28, 2015 @09:34PM (#51199171) Homepage

    What is a "Surface Phone", and how is it different from a "Window 10 Phone", other than the name?

    • Re:Huh? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by squiggleslash ( 241428 ) on Monday December 28, 2015 @09:53PM (#51199259) Homepage Journal

      Surface Phone::Windows 10 For Phones = Nexus Phone::Android

      Basically it's a phone from Microsoft, intended to show off its operating system as it imagines it should be implemented, rather than just one that runs a Microsoft Operating System.

      And yeah, I appreciate that Lumia phones are designed by a division of Microsoft, but I suspect the former Nokia division is still run to a certain extent at arm's length.

      • Surface Phone::Windows 10 For Phones = Nexus Phone::Android

        Isn't that what a Lumia already is? It is made by Microsoft after all, in fact they don't even put any branding on it.

        • Blah, meant to say don't even put any Nokia branding on it.

        • by AK Marc ( 707885 )
          It's done like a regular phone, but running a W10 derivative. What MS needs to do is to design a media update to W10, XBOne, and Surface to auto-discover and cloud all devices in a house. Want to watch netflix on TV? Pull it up on your phone, tablet, or computer, and click "play netlfix on XBOne, and the XBOne will flip to netflix (if not already in use) and let that device be the remote for the TV. Want to game? Play XBOne games on the PC, so long as it's authorized. Use your phone as an XBOne contro
          • What MS needs to do is to design a media update to W10, XBOne, and Surface to auto-discover and cloud all devices in a house.

            ...as long as it ain't my house, go for it. ;)

            The kind of thing that would really piss off the Slashdotters that don't want their devices to do things before they tell them to.

            ...there's a rather logical explanation for that.

        • The only thing I can imagine is the CPU being an Atom, as opposed to an ARM. But then, only advantage THAT brings is that one can install Wintel apps i.e. Windows 7 apps to the phone. But I am quite sure that Visio on such a phone would be pretty much unusable.

      • A surface phone will be running on an Intel x86 chipset, like a surface or a laptop would. That means it's a full fledged PC in your pocket that can run real windows 10 applications straight out of the box like you would on a PC. That's the difference between the "surface" phone and a current Windows phone--mainly, the chipset. It's a big deal. It certainly gives the surface phone a unique selling point that other phones can't offer.

        • Re: Huh? (Score:5, Informative)

          by TheReaperD ( 937405 ) on Tuesday December 29, 2015 @04:35AM (#51200453)

          Except that, unless Microsoft has made vast strides in x86 hardware with a hardware division we don't know about, current low power x86 chips have no business in a smartphone chassis. They are too large, consume too much power and generate too much heat. Even trying to keep them in a tablet format has been troublesome for Microsoft and they had to accept compromises to make it work. So an x86 smartphone is just unrealistic at this time. They've tried a few times and it never worked so they've been forced to work with a crappy ARM port of Windows that no previous generation software works with or anything current built around win32s (which is almost all Windows software). The only reason Windows is still a market force is because of their backwards-compatability model and resulting market lock-in. Without this compatibility, any "Windows" product is a non-starter. I think Microsoft knows this but, tries anyway because the smartphone market is so important to future revenue and they refuse to simplify cede this important market to Apple and Google. I think they are hoping to hang on by their fingernails in the market until it is viable to run an x86 chipset in a smartphone.

          • I think they are hoping to hang on by their fingernails in the market until it is viable to run an x86 chipset in a smartphone.

            The thing that's ultra-super-hilarious is that Linux has actually demonstrated the ability to do the equivalent and nobody wants it. You used to be able to install Linux on the same machines that ran WinCE, e.g. I had it on an iPaq H2215 which had a 400MHz PXA chip. This was when Intel owned an ARM design (XScale) and ironically, it would XScale up, but it wouldn't XScale down. It was the fastest ARM at the time, but they couldn't get the same kind of low power out of it that other licensors had managed.

            Lin

          • I think Microsoft knows this but, tries anyway because the smartphone market is so important to future revenue and they refuse to simplify cede this important market to Apple and Google. I think they are hoping to hang on by their fingernails in the market until it is viable to run an x86 chipset in a smartphone.

            I think Microsoft has partly accepted this - all their major apps - from OneNote to Cortana - are ported to both Android and iOS, thereby eliminating any real reason to prefer Windows Phone to those other platforms

            I do disagree on the power aspect of this. Intel is several generations ahead of everyone else, and could easily issue a single core i5 or something for people to use in Phones. In other words, the GP is right - they could make a pocket sized surface book, along w/ the ability to make phone ca

          • That's not what they need to do though. What they need to do is Frankenstein two CPUs in the same package: a low-power x86 and an ARM. Then, it becomes simple: when stuck in a dock, the x86 CPU kicks in and gives you your (more or less) full-powered desktop computer. When not docked, it shuts down and the ARM processor kicks in and what you have on your maybe 6" phone is Windows Mobile.

            The trick is it's got to be 100% seemless.

            You see, some people think that a Surface Phone has to run the exact same soft

        • Yes, a bullet point that virtually nobody wants.

          What does this offer the end user?

          Intel still hasn't got anything with the same kind of power & power consumption that high-end mobile phones like Apple's iPhone 6's CPU has, and they've been promising "next year it'll be shipping" for, what, 10 years now. They still have to subsidize the use of their chips in tablets.

          You can run plugins with MS Office? Yeah, boatloads of people want that. Sure, there are some businesses that would get it for some of th

    • Nothing. It's just marketing fluff.

    • Microsoft seems to have always been struggling for dominance in the mobile market.
      Does anyone remember
      Windows CE, Pocket PC...
      Microsoft has been beaten time and time again with the likes of Blackberry, Apple, Google...

      I expect the big problem is the abuse of the 1990's and early 2000's from Microsoft. Everyone needed windows on their PC, but not by choice but because they had to to run their software. Microsoft couldn't for one reason or another make mobile devices compatible to run enough legacy apps to m

    • Oh, I thought it was a synonym for "landphone" - those old things with wires, so a stupid thing to name it.
  • Oh good. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MachineShedFred ( 621896 ) on Monday December 28, 2015 @09:36PM (#51199175) Journal

    The only reason that the Surface tablets are getting any traction at all, is because they can run native x64 Windows apps. When they tried an ARM version, it failed so badly that Microsoft ended up writing off almost a billion dollars of inventory that nobody would buy, even at loss-leader pricing.

    Almost nobody* wants a phone that can run x64 Windows apps, so the same trick is unlikely to work in that space.

    * I said almost nobody, because immediately below this comment will be a reply from some corner case or another where someone will want that, but they will be a very small exception to my statement. The massive majority of the market will not want such a product, and will happily continue buying Android or iOS for the foreseeable future.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      I want it

    • by StandardCell ( 589682 ) on Monday December 28, 2015 @10:03PM (#51199297)
      You hit the nail on the head - it's all about the app ecosystem. What killer Windows phone apps ever made any waves? None. Even BlackBerry got the message about Android apps though far too late to save them. If the developers aren't there, the apps won't be there and the customers won't use your platform.
      • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

        What killer Windows phone apps ever made any waves? None.

        They can't. The API set is so god damn restrictive that there's a lot of shit you just can't even do on the platform that you can on iOS/Android/Win32. Universal App slightly alleviated that problem, but barely.

        Slightly off topic, but what's particularly annoying is the WP fan sites periodically name and shame different developers who either don't make an app or make one but don't add all of the same features, which typically results in a small but annoying flash mob on app developer forums about how they'r

      • by DogDude ( 805747 )
        Dude, I couldn't care less about "apps". Neither could most of the adults I know. I think that your half-baked theory is just that.
        • Dude, I couldn't care less about "apps". Neither could most of the adults I know. I think that your half-baked theory is just that.

          If you don't care about apps, then you are probably either buying a phone on prejudice or style. But app availability affects how other people speak of their phones, so it affects your prejudices unless you live in a hole and speak to no one.

          • by DogDude ( 805747 )
            Or, it could be that my phone does everything I need it to do without a thousand stupid "apps".
            • Exactly.

              As long as there are a handful of common apps (FB, E-mail, SMS, e-book, podcast, etc) then there is no real reason for a bunch of other apps.

              Unless you want it as a gaming device. In which case, go ahead and get an Android or Apple thing.

              I have been perfectly happy with my Lumia for the last year and it does everything I need it to. As a matter of fact, I find the Windows Phone OS to be very responsive and polished. It looks and works great.

      • You hit the nail on the head - it's all about the app ecosystem.

        And app developers have not only stopped developing for WP, they are pulling existing apps out of Microsoft's app store.

      • Friends don't let friends call DRM stores "ecosystems".

    • by jetkust ( 596906 )
      I've been trying to run notepad on my phone for years.
    • Re:Oh good. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by BitZtream ( 692029 ) on Monday December 28, 2015 @10:16PM (#51199367)

      I know I'm being an example of what you pointed out as the follow up comment ... but ... bear with me anyway, please.

      My wife is the perfect example of someone who would want a Surface Phone (excepted she'd really want an OSXiOS phone since she's a mac person). She RARELY uses her MBA, but when she does its because a phone just isn't the right input/display device, its pretty much never due to lack of CPU power.

      If should could simply take that phone, and plug it in with Thunderbolt and it instantly becomes a very low powered but fully featured laptop ... with say 256GB of storage? She'd never own another laptop.

      99% of the time, the phone is perfect. The other 1% doesn't require a desktop PC, it requires a big display and a real keyboard/mouse. Having all her data, always being connected, and only needing essentially a KVM to turn it into a practical 'desktop pc'? Awesome-sauce.

      I want the exact same thing, but I require more CPU power so its not going to work for me for a few more years, but I do dev work on her MBA on occasion and its really not that bad for most things if you can keep your working set small enough. You aren't going to want to run freebsd's 'make world' on an MBA as a regular thing, but rebuilding init or sshd is certainly tolerable.

      Again, I may be a corner case, but I don't think she is. She's a vet, so being able to do almost everything on her phone (with a different UI than full desktop mode!, same apps) and then just plugging in a keyboard or display for the rest? Wherever she is because her phone is ALWAYS with her ...

      I think that would be the death of 'PCs' much like cell phones killed off the low end film and digital camera market entirely.

      • You seriously believe that the nth iteration of Windows Mobile is going to kill the PC?

        • No. Not the Nth iteration of a specific OS. An idea and a concept called Continuum. Who came up with Continuum or what OS it runs on is irrelevant. It has the potential to be as much as a game changer as the idea of browsing the web on a thin piece of glass was when some bald guy first held it up at MacWorld.

        • I don't know who or what OS is going to be the one that does it, but Android doesn't have anything I'm interested in, iOS/OSx is my preferred environment, but Windows is by far the one most likely to benefit from doing it and while I don't like the feel of Windows 10, the OS is certainly moving exactly in the direction I want.

          One OS across devices that allows me to seamlessly transition from working on my phone to working on a 'desktop' without actually requiring a full desktop and I'm sold.

          Its not the OS o

      • by rcase5 ( 3781471 )

        I want the exact same thing, but I require more CPU power so its not going to work for me for a few more years, but I do dev work on her MBA on occasion and its really not that bad for most things if you can keep your working set small enough.

        Realistically speaking, the power of a CPU is relative to the current generation of the OS and Apps that it runs. Server CPUs are generally the most powerful, then desktop CPUs less so, then Notebook CPUs lesser still, then Phone CPUs the least powerful. CPUs get more powerful in absolute terms with each new generation. But then developers build more sophisticated OS and App features which tend to take up all of those additional CPU cycles. So, in relative terms, I don't see how a phone will have "more CPU

        • Processors are different in many ways other than just 'powerful', whatever you're defining it to be.

          And the rest of your post is pretty much false for everyone except gamers.

          CPUs have been 'good enough' for most desktop/interactive tasks for a long time. Pretty much any machine released since 2009 is still plenty fast enough to run more modern OSes without noticing it being slower. My 2012 i7 laptop is faster at certain things than the brand new quad Xeon E-54657L (48 cores total) VM server sitting behin

      • I would mod you up but you said "awesome sauce". That and "cool beans" do not belong in any person's vocabulary. Otherwise, you show great wisdom.
        • I've been using both of those expressions for about 40 years and see no reason to give up either of them now. Sorry to disappoint you.

      • I can certainly see a business case for this. For a typical office worker wouldn't you rather just buy and administer a phone vs. laptop, desktop and a phone?
    • The only thing I can think of that could aid in the sales is to include a qwerty keyboard on it which, I know, would be ironic for a Surface phone. It might get a few of the techies that are actually looking for a phone with a physical, connected keyboard that gives them the full screen to work with without chewing through the batteries of a bluetooth keyboard. It's a niche, to be sure, but if it helps in their sales, then why not?

    • As one potential customer I can say it's true for me. I have an iPhone4S, could do with an upgrade, I don't want Apple anymore because for the money I have to pay for it I'm sick of not being able to download files (pics/music) to and from the phone easily (and I will *not* install iTunes on my PC, and don't want to buy any content from Apple), Android seems like an energy draining mess that doesn't just work, I feel like I'd be happy with a Win 10 phone but I expect I'll run into wanting some apps that are

      • Have some stats on Android battery life?

        I have a Nexus 7 that's nearly three years old whose battery life for even watching MP4 video on VLC is still about three hours, and a Nexus 5 that's good for over a day at moderate usage.

        • Ah no I'm sure battery is like the rest, I meant personal energy draining. :-) Malware, updates, things not working... my impression is that Android is high maintenance compared to iOS, though you get more flexibility. Windows phone seemed like it would be a nice balance -- doesn't restrict things like iOS and doesn't require vigilance like Android.

          • by Anonymous Coward

            Your impression based on what? I've never had any malware, and updates are no worse than any other smart device or computer I've ever used.

            Your personal impression is really just your personal fabrication.

          • Are you basing this on experience or just believing everything you read on the internet?

            I have been an Android user for 7 years now and have never once run into malware. As for updates, stick to Nexus and you'll be fine.

            • It's the latter -- I defer to the the Internet when I need to make snap judgements on inconsequential things.

              This being the Internet, it sounds like Android is more tricky, the names I keep hearing from the Android world are Samsung something or other, LG and so on, Nexus isn't on top of that list in my recollection.

    • I don't need a phone that can run x64 apps, but I wouldn't mind it if the performance and battery life was acceptable. I have a Surface 3 tablet. I run Windows 10 and Ubuntu on it. It is very nice hardware. If they can do the same with phones I might give it a shot, although I'll admit I have enough invested in Android apps that I might hedge my bets.

    • Almost nobody* wants a phone that can run x64 Windows apps, so the same trick is unlikely to work in that space.

      Well that depends. IF they sell it COMING WITH some sort of docking station, like it seems they want to do... kind of, ( with a few / enough USB ports for peripherals ) AND it has HDMI and DVI / displayport outputs at at least 1080P, AND has similar battery life as android / ios devices do AND has a distinct interface when in standalone phone mode that switches to desktop mode when docked ( and still has a desktop phone app something like skype ) AND is made with hardware that is at least strong enough for

    • I never really had the use for an tablet and hence don't own one, except a old B&W NOOK ebook ready with Android.

      Now, what I would really like is to use

      1. [Preferably] Ubuntu on a tablet to run wine and use RosettaStone for language learning

      2. Use Windows to run Rosetta Stone.

      This may be an option in the future: https://www.codeweavers.com/po... [codeweavers.com]

      But currently, what are the options for CHEAP x64 tablets?

      I wish I could buy the cheap AMAZON Fire but RosettaStone won't run on it. The Web V
      • by badzilla ( 50355 )
        I run Rosetta Stone on an inexpensive Linx 8 tablet with Windows 10. Rosetta Stone wants you to load new languages from CD-ROM but obviously tablets don't have optical drive. You can get round that by plugging in a USB CD-ROM drive or creating an ISO on another computer. Apart from that everything works well. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Linx-i... [amazon.co.uk]
        • by yooy ( 1146753 )
          Thanks.
          How do you do this with the ISO? My windows experience seems like 1000 years old. At that time you could use CD ROM emulators.
          How do you do this? Or is windows 10 able to access ISO files?
    • Almost nobody* wants a phone that can run x64 Windows apps, so the same trick is unlikely to work in that space.

      Why? And before you answer that have a think about the direction of Windows 10 or the idea of Continuum.

      You have a device that is a phone. It has native apps to do phoneish things. Yet the underlying system is x86. Why should you care? Most people don't know what x86 or ARM is. The Surface RT didn't fail because it was ARM the Surface RT failed because it was useless, and by useless I mean there was nothing that actually ran on it all the while it was sold as a Windows computer.

      You are now being presented w

      • Of course nobody really cares if it's x86 or ARM, but that basic architectural choice brings along with it the baggage of each architecture. With x86, you have a power hog of a CPU, though it's far less today with what Intel has been doing. You have legacy bloated software primarily written for a UI paradigm you don't have on a phone.

        With ARM, you have fantastic power management, but very little in the way of user-installable 3rd party applications without cultivating some kind of ecosystem or bridge to a

        • With x86, you have a power hog of a CPU, though it's far less today with what Intel has been doing.

          So a problem being worked on getting better all the time? Speaking of I think the current gen Atoms do a fine enough job of firing up any old desktop app. You won't be doing CAD on it, but hey you probably won't want to anyway.

          You have legacy bloated software primarily written for a UI paradigm you don't have on a phone.

          What has an architecture got to do with legacy bloatware? Speaking of how does the continuum API promote legacy bloatware when the API is new and different?

          Microsoft has already shown that they are incapable of going the ARM route - the Surface RT was a grease fire because they artificially limited what they allowed you to do with that version of Windows (no GPOs, no Active Directory - DOA for business), and put way too many restrictions on what they would allow developers to do. So, it was still-born

          Microsoft has shown that, but for none of the reasons you list. The Surface RT was never designed for, targeted at or marketed to

          • What has an architecture got to do with legacy bloatware? Speaking of how does the continuum API promote legacy bloatware when the API is new and different?

            Because most legacy bloatware runs on Intel chips? The reason most people buy a computer of any sort is for it to run the apps they want, The reason for an Intel chip is to run software on it. Most Intel software is not designed for phones. Plugging it into something like a brainless laptop isn't going to improve things much, since if I'm going to

    • The one thing that could be cool, is if a "Surface Phone" was powerful enough to run some of the smaller but not quite mobile games available on Steam. If MS hooked up with Valve and made that happen for the Surface Phone, that would make me interested. I have a Lumia 1520 and right now I don't see a real reason to get any new phone, WP, iOS or Android.
    • by movdqa ( 1122661 )
      I thought that I would want an x64 Windows phone many years ago so that I could hook up a KVM and just carry my phone back and forth but I have an iPhone and a MacBook Pro right now and these two work quite well for me. The phone takes care of phone stuff and the MacBook Pro takes care of work and PC stuff. I don't see how the phone could ever have the specs of a very good laptop. Then Microsoft came out with Windows 8/8.1/10 and my thinking is that I'll never buy a Windows system. Ever. Again. That articl
  • As long as it comes with a kickstand, I'll buy it.
  • I was replacing an iPhone, and I liked the size, the screen and the camera.
    I still like all those features, but I can't wait until the contract is up so I can get whatever the latest and biggest Nexus phone is at that time.

    It works great, but it's like a two-year forced vacation from downloading apps. It doesn't have SiriusXM or Square apps, for FSM's sake... if I'd known those would never arrive, I'd have passed on the experience.
  • by LocoBurger ( 18797 ) on Monday December 28, 2015 @10:38PM (#51199469) Homepage

    On topic with the last post on the front page, I think Microsoft's best move is to push in the same direction as Mozilla: web apps that are as good as native apps. Then your platform isn't the important thing.

    Then why choose Windows (on your phone)? I think corporate workers would love for their work PC to just be the phone in their pocket. It should be x86-64 and run full-blown desktop application when a monitor, pointer and keyboard are attached. The latest Windows 10 Mobile is close, but it can't run any old x86 code. If my work PC was a Windows phone, I'd definitely find it easier to move in that direction in my personal life.

    Web apps for the future, the occasional local app, and make the whole history of Windows on x86 a non-replicable asset for your platform.

    • On topic with the last post on the front page, I think Microsoft's best move is to push in the same direction as Mozilla: web apps that are as good as native apps. Then your platform isn't the important thing.

      There are two problems with this idea. One, web apps are never as good as native apps. Two, the only thing selling Microsoft products is platform lock-in. Your ideas would destroy Microsoft nearly overnight, so it's easy to see why they haven't made you CEO.

    • Do you know who pushed web apps? Apple, after the introduction of the iPhone. There were some decent web apps, but everybody and their cat was asking for native apps. It's not going to work. Moreover, I can run a web app on my iPhone or Android tablet, so why a Windows phone?

      I really don't understand why people think a Windows phone would be so nice with a full-sized keyboard, monitor, and mouse as accessories. If you have to carry that around, why not a laptop?

  • by xxxJonBoyxxx ( 565205 ) on Monday December 28, 2015 @11:04PM (#51199567)

    At a corporate level, the ability for IT admins to manage everything from AD is killer. For consumers, I suspect Microsoft will finally figure out how to extend XBox games to phones, build some killer ecosystem around major titles like Halo and Minecraft, and go to the bank.

    • Enterprise customers have five or six years of making iOS and Android devices working with their infrastructure. I'd say the day has come and gone when AD integration is a significant reason to toss out current smart devices in favor of Redmond's latest perfect mobile solution.

      • I'm not sure I really disagree with you, but to play devil's advocate the "problem" with such a position is the short life span of mobile devices. People expect to have a new one every two to three years and execs expect a new one every year.

        Compare this to PCs which have a three to five year replacement cycle and, importantly, an often even longer software licensing term. I'm still using software on the desktop that I bought ten years ago, but the oldest carry over on mobile is just a few years.

        In other wo

  • "Offer me apps."
    "Yes!"
    "Accessories, too, promise me that."
    "All that I have and more. Please..."
    "Offer me everything I ask for."
    "Anything you want..."

    *stab*

    "I want MeeGo back, you son of a bitch!"

  • by realmolo ( 574068 ) on Monday December 28, 2015 @11:25PM (#51199653)

    All they need are these features:

    A phone that can be fully-managed with Group Policy/Active Directory

    A phone that has a fully-functional Outlook client, with ALL the features of desktop Outlook that are practical to cram into a phone

    That's IT. Most businesses would jump at the chance for those. Mobile security is a big issue, and there *still* isn't a truly good Exchange client for any phone (though some are close).

    The fact that MS hasn't realized this stuff is mystifying. What are they thinking?

    • by SeaFox ( 739806 )

      All they need are these features:

      A phone that can be fully-managed with Group Policy/Active Directory

      A phone that has a fully-functional Outlook client, with ALL the features of desktop Outlook that are practical to cram into a phone

      That's IT. Most businesses would jump at the chance for those. Mobile security is a big issue, and there *still* isn't a truly good Exchange client for any phone (though some are close).

      The fact that MS hasn't realized this stuff is mystifying. What are they thinking?

      There's a lot more to the "smartphone market" than business features. I notice nothing on your list that would make the average consumer excited.
      Once upon a time BlackBerry ruled business smartphones. Why did that end? Because people wanted to be able to use their non-work smartphone as their work phone. So the phone that was king for consumers (the iPhone) started to displace the Blackberry.

      If Microsoft wants to take over the smartphone market, they first have to make a dent in the hearts of the non-busine

      • If Microsoft wants to take over the smartphone market, they first have to make a dent in the hearts of the non-business market.

        Microsoft doesn't need to take over the smartphone market, they just need not become irrelevant. Smartphones, tablets, and phablets are becoming serious contenders in roles where laptops used to reign unchallenged. If Microsoft doesn't at least have a meaningful presence in that space they lose a generation of users.

        Targeting the non-business markets is a losing proposition for Micr

        • by johanw ( 1001493 )

          Why? I can use outlook mail on my Android device very well, and I'm sure it is also possible on iOS. MS even writes its own Outlook app for these. That it is also possible on windows phone is not a unique feature of windows phone.

      • There's a lot more to the "smartphone market" than business features. I notice nothing on your list that would make the average consumer excited.

        There was never anything in Windows Phone that would make the average consumer excited. WinCE phones were only ever popular with business, and only because of their relatively high level of integration. You could develop your own software with visual studio and deploy it to your devices without paying Microsoft for the privilege. That is the only reason statistically anyone (that is, above the level of noise) ever gave one tenth of one shit about a Windows phone.

    • by johanw ( 1001493 )

      Ah yes, I had this stuff once: I installed Exchange support on my old Symbian phone, and the next thing I knew was I had to hack my way in my own phone to remove the option for the company IT department to reformat my phone. Never again on my private device. If the company wants those rights they'll have to provide me the phone too. I now run an Android app that parses outlook webmail and has no entrance for sneaky admins.

    • Because alternatives exist in app form.

      Policies are set on my Android device by a third party program that are enforced by banning the logon of the device on our corporate network if the program doesn't exist. A fully functional (or at least sufficiently functional) outlook client exists in the form of another 3rd party program that provides access to push emails, calender, tasks, etc

      If I don't have a sufficient password set to unlock my phone, it doesn't work. If I don't have disk encryption on it doesn't

    • by loopkin ( 267769 )

      What you're describing is a Lumia with Windows 10 for phones, managed by Intune.

      And no, it's not what businesses want. Intune/SCCM is full of proprietary stuff, that doesn't stick to the diversity of a modern information system.

  • I take many of my tech queues from my tech friends. I have seen exactly zero microsoft mobile devices in their hands. Zero, not few, not one, but zero. I even see the occasional blackberry simply because they just don't care and their company gave it to them. Quite simply it is not what the cool kids are using.

    What I do see are about half Windows machines because that is what they use at work, a huge number of Macs because of their Unix flavour, and a goodly number of Linux based laptops. For mobile I see
  • M$ is censoring it.

  • I just can't get past the Metro look. Maybe it's just me, but when I look at the screen all I see is squares, I have to examine each one to see what app it corresponds to. If I were colorblind, it would be even worse. With iOS or Android, I can glance at a screen full of icons and instantly find what I'm looking for, because the icons are much more distinct from each other. I find it very hard to believe MS did any usability testing and concluded they were giving users what they want.
  • Once I have a surface phone running full blown windows, I can have a dock and run my whole environment from one device.
    I can add an app to the tablet of my choice so it can act as a monitor to my phone, or perhaps MS starts selling dumb screens that run the display wirelessly from a phone.
    I can have a laptop that is just a screen and keyboard, no brains, that runs wirelessly from my phone. It is all on my phone. I have one device. In that world, Windows wins the same way it has won big in desktop and laptop

Mathematicians stand on each other's shoulders. -- Gauss

Working...