5 ms·

Every major version was a new os. Their phone strategy was terrible and lacked commitment. It didn't help that it was started by one CEO and abandoned midway th

Every major version was a new os. Their phone strategy was terrible and lacked commitment. It didn't help that it was started by one CEO and abandoned midway through by the next CEO.

bsharitt 9y ago
> Every major version was a new os. I had had some Nokia phone with WP7 and it was a pretty nice phone despite lacking some apps, and I was looking forward the the future of the platform. Of course when the future did come witn WP8, they said there would be no updates to existing phones and they were pushing developers to use APIs that would only work on the new OS meaning my limited pool of apps wouldn't grow on my current phone, which hurt more than the no OS upgrade. While the lack of OS upgrade isn't uncommon in the Android world, Google doesn't generally push developers to abandon the old OS base so quickly. So with my Windows Phone basically EOL'd overnight(within about 6 months or so of buying it), I went back to Android.
gruturo 9y ago
It failed repeatedly under one CEO, until the next CEO put it out of its misery. Ironically, by the time it was terminated it had developed into a very valid product indeed. Shame - Apple and Android definitely need more competition from someone with actual resources (sorry to the Sailfish, Firefox OS, Ubuntu Phone, etc etc).
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- ThrowawayR2 9y ago
  > It failed repeatedly under one CEO, until the next CEO put it out of its misery. The person who was the head of the Windows Phone group while it failed repeatedly under the first CEO was promoted and put in charge of the entire Windows division by the next CEO. Something to contemplate.
Touche 9y ago
I don't think that was at all part of why it failed. Palm stuck to their OS but theirs failed too. I think all that ultimately mattered was that Android became the Windows of mobile phones; an operating system that each manufacturer/carrier could customize to sell the idea of value-add (with no actual value-add, I know).
- miguelrochefort 9y ago
  Palm did not kill webOS. HP killed webOS.
  - notfromhere 9y ago
    webOS wasn't going to survive regardless
  - Touche 9y ago
    Palm sold webOS because it ran out of money. It ran out of money because webOS was not a success. It was really close, Verizon was going to make the Pre its flagship device but changed its mind when the Droid was a success. The smartphone landscape could looks very different right now had the timelines been just a tad different.
mustacheemperor 9y ago
>Every major version was a new os I can report this is exactly what drove me from the platform. I adopted Windows Phone out the gate and received a never-ending litany of supportive emails, oneDrive bonuses, etc. There were missing features, but early adopters were promised they were coming and I think most of us thought the experience was worth compromising for early on. Then Windows Phone "7.5" released barely a year after I'd bought my phone, included most of the features early adopters had begged for, and didn't support any of the phones people had already bought. Soon some apps didn't work without 7.5 either. It felt like we all got flipped the bird for taking a risk on Microsoft's platform and I switched to Android. Every aspect of it felt dishonest and disingenuous - "7.5" implies an incremental release, and in terms of features it really should have been one. I have no idea if they just couldn't hack it on the weaker early devices or if MS honestly thought we were all going to run out and buy Nokias immediately. I mean, I nearly did a year later when they were $1...

Every major version was a new os. Their phone strategy was terrible and lacked commitment. It didn't help that it was started by one CEO and abandoned midway through by the next CEO.

bsharitt 9y ago

> Every major version was a new os. I had had some Nokia phone with WP7 and it was a pretty nice phone despite lacking some apps, and I was looking forward the the future of the platform. Of course when the future did come witn WP8, they said there would be no updates to existing phones and they were pushing developers to use APIs that would only work on the new OS meaning my limited pool of apps wouldn't grow on my current phone, which hurt more than the no OS upgrade. While the lack of OS upgrade isn't uncommon in the Android world, Google doesn't generally push developers to abandon the old OS base so quickly. So with my Windows Phone basically EOL'd overnight(within about 6 months or so of buying it), I went back to Android.

gruturo 9y ago

It failed repeatedly under one CEO, until the next CEO put it out of its misery. Ironically, by the time it was terminated it had developed into a very valid product indeed. Shame - Apple and Android definitely need more competition from someone with actual resources (sorry to the Sailfish, Firefox OS, Ubuntu Phone, etc etc).

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
ThrowawayR2 9y ago
> It failed repeatedly under one CEO, until the next CEO put it out of its misery. The person who was the head of the Windows Phone group while it failed repeatedly under the first CEO was promoted and put in charge of the entire Windows division by the next CEO. Something to contemplate.

Touche 9y ago

I don't think that was at all part of why it failed. Palm stuck to their OS but theirs failed too. I think all that ultimately mattered was that Android became the Windows of mobile phones; an operating system that each manufacturer/carrier could customize to sell the idea of value-add (with no actual value-add, I know).

miguelrochefort 9y ago
Palm did not kill webOS. HP killed webOS.
- notfromhere 9y ago
  webOS wasn't going to survive regardless
- Touche 9y ago
  Palm sold webOS because it ran out of money. It ran out of money because webOS was not a success. It was really close, Verizon was going to make the Pre its flagship device but changed its mind when the Droid was a success. The smartphone landscape could looks very different right now had the timelines been just a tad different.

mustacheemperor 9y ago

>Every major version was a new os I can report this is exactly what drove me from the platform. I adopted Windows Phone out the gate and received a never-ending litany of supportive emails, oneDrive bonuses, etc. There were missing features, but early adopters were promised they were coming and I think most of us thought the experience was worth compromising for early on. Then Windows Phone "7.5" released barely a year after I'd bought my phone, included most of the features early adopters had begged for, and didn't support any of the phones people had already bought. Soon some apps didn't work without 7.5 either. It felt like we all got flipped the bird for taking a risk on Microsoft's platform and I switched to Android. Every aspect of it felt dishonest and disingenuous - "7.5" implies an incremental release, and in terms of features it really should have been one. I have no idea if they just couldn't hack it on the weaker early devices or if MS honestly thought we were all going to run out and buy Nokias immediately. I mean, I nearly did a year later when they were $1...