7 ms·
> the various disastrous incarnations of Windows Phone Surprisingly the phone was loved. What wasnt loved was the one desktop everywhere so when they tried to
by ProAm 6y ago
> the various disastrous incarnations of Windows Phone
Surprisingly the phone was loved. What wasnt loved was the one desktop everywhere so when they tried to push 'Metro' to the PC, tablet and phone it struggled. But the tiled phone interface was good, and a lot of people liked it.
I really think Ballmer and Cook are manifestations of the same person. Mac OS quality is the worst it's been in probably a decade+? Hardware design for the laptops have been under massive scrutiny. Cook brought the Watch to the table which is a massive success. Their services business plan is just a money grab like their approach to accessories. But Apple isn't innovating much, they have been cashing in in recent years (besides the watch imo, maybe airpods but Id personally disagree)
- hanley 6y agoThe Windows phone was loved because it had excellent Nokia hardware. The software was not loved and the app store was lacking.
- nailer 6y agoI think the software was loved. It was years before Apple and Android did their own 'natively digital' designs which echoed Metro and Zune's design aesthetic.
- thomasz 6y agoOwned one. It was a damn good phone, had a great UI that remains unsurpassed to this day, but it clearly came at least two years too late to gain the critical mass needed for a thriving ecosystem.
- dougmany 6y agoI miss having a copy and paste that worked so well.
- VRay 6y agoI loved the UX on it too, but the crappy locked-down web browser killed it for me.. I don't even use apps, but since I couldn't load Firefox with uBlock on there, and there weren't any single-purpose apps, it was really rough
- m0ngr31 6y agoThe software was absolutely loved. You're right about the app store lacking though. I'd still take WP over Android or iOS.
- kerng 6y agoSoftware was really good though - just not widely used to get enough credit. Sad that we are stuck with Android and iOS basically now.
- ProAm 6y ago> The software was not loved and the app store was lacking. The app store was definitely lacking. In my own circle of real life users I did not meet one person that did not really like the phone (software included). Granted this is just my own experience so very limited but its also a group of non-technical people just sharing with me. I never heard one complaint in fact it was usually more accolades.
- kd913 6y agoThe phone had great software and could run on incredibly low-end hardware like the Nokia 520. I had that phone and it was functional, fast and far better designed than any of the Android equivalent low-ends at the time. Biggest flaw at the time was Google's shady nonsense involving banning Google Maps/Youtube on Windows Phone without a native app.
- scarface74 6y agoSo who is “innovating” more in electronics hardware? As far as the Macs, outside of the keyboard fiasco which has been rectified, the recent Macs are getting good reviews from people who were rightfully critical a few years ago. The ARM Macs will soon be as far ahead of equivalent PCs as the iPhones are Androids when it comes to processing power.
- ProAm 6y agoThings like USB ports, touchbar, etc... Mac still makes a good laptop, but in a historical sense I think this is a still a lowpoint for their hardware comparatively to themselves in quality and functionality.
- scarface74 6y agoApple has been aggressively ditching “legacy” ports since the first iMacs in 1998. How is Apple going USB-C only now different than the original iMac going USB only?
- ProAm 6y agoUSB-C is fine, its the number of ports that is the issue and not consumer friendly.. And I think USB-A isn't quite legacy just yet (it's OK they ditched the VGA and/or DVI ports), there are still a lot of need for one of those ports. Same with a card reader slot. I also think there is a need for a headphone jack even though bluetooth is qutie viable.
- scarface74 6y agoThere was need for all of the “legacy” ports when the iMac was introduced. The idea of getting rid of ports and standardizing on one when it became technically possible didn’t start under Cook.
- ProAm 6y agoI agree didn't start but has definitely continued and has been encouraged under Cook.
- simonh 6y agoThe last iteration of the phone was loved and was genuinely an interesting product, but by then it was way, way too late. The disastrous limitations and compromises in the earlier iterations doomed the series.
- sylens 6y agoThey had a little momentum building but they broke app compatibility between versions 7 and 8. Why would any developer trust them again?
- WorldMaker 6y agoThe phone carriers doomed Windows Phone. AT&T and Verizon both agreed they didn't want to sell three OSes, they barely wanted to sell two. You could have the best phone OS there is, but if no one is selling it it doesn't matter.
- lotsofpulp 6y agoMSFT could have opened up retail stores with their boatloads of cash like Apple. But they didn’t want to take the risk with a low margin high cost center activity like providing in person support and expanding headcount. Hence no reward. And with their recent closing of Microsoft stores, it’s clear that they are doubling down on rent seeking from Office and Windows licenses.
- WorldMaker 6y agoI still think Retail Stores were a red herring. Even if people bought unlocked Windows phones directly from Microsoft Stores they couldn't get SIMs from half the major carriers at any given time as Microsoft was forced not to support given Verizon SIMs as one point due to a dumb war with them and Verizon flat out refusing to allow the devices on to the network. (At a different point AT&T almost did the same thing, but relented.) On top of that, even though that was towards the end of the era of massive phone hardware subsidies from the carriers, it was still the era of massive phone hardware subsidies from the carriers if you bought directly from them. Apple had/has "luxury brand" caché that Microsoft couldn't build into its stores if it wanted to, and first mover advantage on top of that. Many consumers didn't blink if there was a huge sticker price difference between the iPhone in the AT&T Store and the unlocked one in the Apple Store, because it was a luxury brand. Microsoft was never going to earn that. Additionally, if a lot of people showed up to an AT&T or Verizon store with an unlocked iPhone and were refused a SIM that would be a major scandal, and would get a lot of luxury good "entitlement" people out of the woodwork. People told that they couldn't buy an unlocked Microsoft phone and use it on their carrier just shrugged and moved on (to an iPhone or an Android). > And with their recent closing of Microsoft stores, it’s clear that they are doubling down on rent seeking from Office and Windows licenses. Windows and Office are still getting improvements, it is a bit disingenuous to consider those products "rent seeking". Xbox and Surface are doing just fine with or without Microsoft-specific Stores. Besides, both before and after the Microsoft Stores, Microsoft had good retail relationships with Best Buy and others. It's not like there is "zero" Microsoft retail exposure without Microsoft owning their own boutique retail stores.
- mumblemumble 6y agoAs a consumer, I loved the phone. As a developer, I was afraid to touch it. Dumping the old Windows Mobile platform for Windows Phone was understandable, but the compatibility break between Windows Phone 7 and Windows Phone 8 was really off-putting. Though I think the biggest problem there is that it didn't happen in a vacuum. It was one more event in a fairly long list of Microsoft technologies and APIs that were shipped to much fanfare, and then abandoned shortly after release. It made it hard to feel comfortable trying any Microsoft tech that wasn't at least a fewy years old. Including mobile APIs. Which, given what happened with Windows Phone 8, did not turn out to be an overabundance of caution. The problem hurt more than Windows Phone, too. A lot of people got sick of having the rug repeatedly yanked out from under them, and started developing on non-Microsoft tech stacks. Which then removed a lot of the need to run Windows Server, and things sort of snowballed. Despite all his infamous ranting about the importance of keeping developers happy early on, the Ballmer years turned out to be the era when Microsoft perfected the art of alienating developers.
- ProAm 6y agoI think part of that was the size of the paradigm shift MS tried to accomplish. It was a huge gamble and its important to take chances like that, but to change all three platforms so drastically made it hard for developers (table, PC and phone). And then I dont believe MS either A) invested enough or B) gave it enough time so when they pulled support developers definitely felt it. They were also a couple years late, as for android and iphone had considerable market share. I think the same can be said for google these days, there is no reason to risk investing time or money into one of their new technologies because it will get dropped if its not one of the big 4 (search, ads, youtube, GCP, maybe arguably android)
- mumblemumble 6y agoIndeed. I'm actually in the middle of dealing with blowback from some Google product yanking right now. The big difference is, Google pulls stunts like that small things that aren't critical to the company's business. Microsoft, on the other hand, was blithely jackhammering away at the foundation of their business. They did fine, insofar as they're still profitable and well-capitalized, but one has to wonder what things could have been like for them if they hadn't spent the aughties playing Dr Strangelove's Hand with themselves. OTOH, one could argue that spending a decade eating humble pie was a necessary step in teaching them how to play nice with others.
- blackearl 6y agoTried to push Metro on servers too. I remember the brief time where Server didn't have a start button but you could go to the bottom left most pixel to get the start menu to show. What were they thinking? Metro is fine now but that first iteration was a disaster