4 ms·

> even MS had Windows OS version (a crappy one) for smartphones. Actually, Windows Mobile was the market leader for a while after PalmOS development fell behin

> even MS had Windows OS version (a crappy one) for smartphones. Actually, Windows Mobile was the market leader for a while after PalmOS development fell behind and people gave up on Palm. I had to do a market analysis once and there were a couple hundred different models of WM 5.x / 6.0 devices, if I recall correctly. (As an aside, Google really should have foreseen Android's eventual fragmentation problem since WM had it in spades a decade earlier.) And, unlike the current market leaders for smartphone OSes, Windows Mobile had the same open model as desktop Windows: no app store or walled garden, just compile your app and load it onto the phone and it would run. So, not so crappy after all.

coldtea 10y ago
>And, unlike the current market leaders for smartphone OSes, Windows Mobile had the same open model as desktop Windows: no app store or walled garden, just compile your app and load it onto the phone and it would run. So, not so crappy after all. From the openness aspect no. From any aspect that actually matters while using a device, yes.
digi_owl 10y ago
And i can't help wonder if we lost something in the transition. Back then you had all manner of form factors. HTC got big acting as the white box producer for a number of brands. And the range included devices with swivel hinge keyboards. I think the capacitive touch screen has been more of a tradeoff that people want to admit.