5 ms·

Why different OS? WP7 is a great system.

by kzkg 15y ago

majika 15y ago
Really? Let's talk about compatibility with Linux, ergo, being able to use your phone as a mass-storage device. Let's talk about compatibility with all major mobile web apps. Let's talk about the ability, or lack thereof, to detach oneself from Microsoft's ecosystem, should you decide to get a Windows Phone. Who wants to use Bing, Hotmail, or the Windows Live stuff? Let's talk about universal usage in modern society, resulting in apps for everything you could ever want. For instance, my university offers Android and iOS apps for navigation throughout the obscenely large campus. Windows Phone 7 is a crippled system. It makes me sad, because Nokia makes great phones. It's a pity they didn't go with Android, which would give them the freedom to do whatever they want, not needing Google's permission. I would buy a Nokia Android phone in a heartbeat.
- kzkg 15y ago
  1. It's a phone, not a mass-storage device. 2. Based on my experience, they work pretty well. 3. Or gmail, twitter, facebook? (although bing kinda annoys me as a default search engine) 4. Just wait for WP7 userbase to grow.
  - cryptoz 15y ago
    > 1. It's a phone, not a mass-storage device. Okay, this is getting silly. It's a phone, it's a mass storage device, it's a computer, it's a global networking device, it's a camera, it's a GPS locator, etc. It's all of them at the same time. Don't call it "a phone" and ignore everything else it can (or should be able to) do.
    - ugh 15y ago
      Why do you want it to be a mass storage device? I don’t get it.
      - icebraining 15y ago
        To copy files to it? Music, documents, videos, etc? Sure, you can use Wifi, but that's slower, more cumbersome and wastes battery life.
        ugh 15y ago
        Manually? What century is this? Isn’t there a way to sync? That would be strictly preferable to a mass storage device.
        icebraining 15y ago
        No, it wouldn't, exactly because that wouldn't be OS agnostic. And who said anything about it being manual? Mass storage devices can be synced. Mine certainly are.
        ugh 15y ago
        Meh. Just because some geeky stuff is missing doesn’t make WP7 not a great OS. As if anyone cares about Linux.
        cryptoz 15y ago
        1. Plug in. 2. Drag and Drop files. That's geeky? I disagree.
        ugh 15y ago
        That’s a sucky way of transferring stuff. I’m not sure why anyone would want to do that to themselves.
        icebraining 15y ago
        Compared to iTunes on Windows, it's heaven. My mother has an iPod and that thing can't do anything without freezing the UI.
    - sjs 15y ago
      "We’re getting to the point where everything’s a computer in a different form factor. So what, right? So what if it’s built with a computer inside it? It doesn’t matter. It’s, what is it? How do you use it? You know, how does the consumer approach it? And so who cares what’s inside it anymore?" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vc8QXzYQoBY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vc8QXzYQoBY
  - majika 15y ago
    > 1. It's a phone, not a mass-storage device. No, I'm sorry. I want to access my files in whatever way I choose. What follows from the lack of mass-storage connectivity is that I can't access my files on a public computer, or a computer that I don't have admin rights over (e.g. computers in my university's labs). To actually defend this restriction is deplorable. It hurts all of us. > 2. Based on my experience, they work pretty well. I'm not going to take your word for it. > 3. Or gmail, twitter, facebook? (although bing kinda annoys me as a default search engine) This sidesteps my point: that Microsoft's online services, which are mostly pretty crap, seem to be the only viable option on WP7. Is this impression correct? I used a WP7 phone for 15 minutes in a store a few months ago, and it seems pretty heavy on MS. Other commenters in this thread have pointed out that Gmail on WP is buggy and lacking in features. Gee, ain't that a coincidence? > 4. Just wait for WP7 userbase to grow. Hah. I've tried this before. In Christmas 2009, I bought a hot new phone on a hot new platform. It was the most innovative phone out at the time. It had the best multitasking (), video calling, great PDF reader, and a great, fast, browser. It had a physical keyboard - which provided all sorts of nice features, like quick access to contacts by typing their names, or shortcut keys in every app. The platform was based on Debian Linux, and allowed native terminal access (i.e., it came rooted), so things like overclocking was a sinch. In fact, save for WebOS, it was the only multitasking phone at the time. But its multitasking is still better than that of Android and iOS today. The phone was the Nokia N900, based on Maemo 5. What happened? Well, the phone sold well, but Maemo eventually died. My phone is now running on a dead platform, and it sucks (apps are suffering bitrot). So, I'm not going down that road again of buying a phone based on future aspirations. Buy what works now, because it's a good indication of what will work later.
- recoiledsnake 15y ago
  A lot of things on there are the ones that you're missing but not the general public. Just look at the iPhone's success. If you're a Linux type(or MS hater) then these phones are not for you. The rest of the 99% of the planet might consider them. >It's a pity they didn't go with Android, which would give them the freedom to do whatever they want, not needing Google's permission. I would buy a Nokia Android phone in a heartbeat. Android giving them the freedom to do whatever they want? Huh? The source code of a new version is dropped over a wall after their competitor has already released a device with it(if the source is released at all). Android dev is nothing like the Linux kernel dev. Maybe you would know that? Also, Nokia was in talks with Google over Android but Google wouldn't give them many concessions. Your anger should probably be directed at them. And it's not even like you can complain about the lack of options on Linux. There's a ton of Android phones coming out every month, each better in specs than the month previous and they're pretty popular and have loads of apps. What next, you'd buy the iPhone 5 but the only thing stopping you is that it doesn't run Android?
  - rbanffy 15y ago
    > If you're a Linux type(or MS hater) Careful. Those are not synonymous. > Nokia was in talks with Google over Android but Google wouldn't give them many concessions. Nokia wouldn't need concessions. Barnes & Noble didn't need the, nor did Amazon. They grabbed the code and used it. Android would be a good choice because a) Nokia could tailor the experience to whatever they wanted b) they already have extensive experience with Linux (and Android is Linux) and c) there is actually a market for Android phones True Microsoft gave them a ton of cash to tip the balance towards WP7. That should also indicate what is actually needed to tip the balance towards making WP7 phones - that, unless US$ 1+ billion is involved, WP7 is not worth it.
    - recoiledsnake 15y ago
      Nokia already proved itself to be inept at making software. Customizing Android and then integrating the source code that Google throws over a wall is not a good move. B&N makes a e-reader which is pretty limited in rival competition and software features. Where's the iReader? Coming to Amazon, they know a few things about software and a laser like focus that Nokia lacks. In fact, the Nokia board specifically recruited a CEO who had experience in managing software companies(Macromedia/MS) just because Nokia was spiraling down because of the software and it was almost too late to right the course without the risk of completely dying. >rue Microsoft gave them a ton of cash to tip the balance towards WP7. That should also indicate what is actually needed to tip the balance towards making WP7 phones - that, unless US$ 1+ billion is involved, WP7 is not worth it. I think it was more about Nokia's need rather than because WP7 sucked as a choice. Regardless of WP7 sucking and Android rocking, Nokia would need to survive 2011 intact, and if making the hardware and writing drivers for WP7 took more than 7 months, what makes you think they can reliably modify Android(a software task that Nokia is weak at) in such a short span of time? Remember, every month that Nokia doesn't have a viable smartphone platform on the shelves, it's bleeding mindshare, marketshare and money to run operations. They were also able to win the right to modify WP7 and get the latest source code before it's throw over a wall by Google after Motorola/Samsung/HTC already have a device on store shelves running it.
rbanffy 15y ago
We can really see it taking over the market any time now...
- sjs 15y ago
  That's pretty funny. iirc you are a desktop Linux user, right? Do you use it because it's "taking over the market" or because it works well for you?
  - rbanffy 15y ago
    I use Linux because it's a flexible, elegant and simple architecture, battle-tested under the most demanding conditions and based on a standard that has almost 40 years of service. Also because it closes any impedance mismatch between my desktop, my phone and the servers that run the code I write. About that, as far as the two markets I am most concerned, phones (we are talking about them, after all) and servers (where I work), Linux already took over the market. WP7, OTOH, was written from scratch because it's predecessor (WinCE/WinMO) was so miserably broken Microsoft really had no choice but starting from scratch.

Why different OS? WP7 is a great system.

by kzkg 15y ago

Why different OS? WP7 is a great system.

Really? Let's talk about compatibility with Linux, ergo, being able to use your phone as a mass-storage device. Let's talk about compatibility with all major mobile web apps. Let's talk about the ability, or lack thereof, to detach oneself from Microsoft's ecosystem, should you decide to get a Windows Phone. Who wants to use Bing, Hotmail, or the Windows Live stuff? Let's talk about universal usage in modern society, resulting in apps for everything you could ever want. For instance, my university offers Android and iOS apps for navigation throughout the obscenely large campus. Windows Phone 7 is a crippled system. It makes me sad, because Nokia makes great phones. It's a pity they didn't go with Android, which would give them the freedom to do whatever they want, not needing Google's permission. I would buy a Nokia Android phone in a heartbeat.

kzkg 15y ago
1. It's a phone, not a mass-storage device. 2. Based on my experience, they work pretty well. 3. Or gmail, twitter, facebook? (although bing kinda annoys me as a default search engine) 4. Just wait for WP7 userbase to grow.
- cryptoz 15y ago
  > 1. It's a phone, not a mass-storage device. Okay, this is getting silly. It's a phone, it's a mass storage device, it's a computer, it's a global networking device, it's a camera, it's a GPS locator, etc. It's all of them at the same time. Don't call it "a phone" and ignore everything else it can (or should be able to) do.
  - ugh 15y ago
    Why do you want it to be a mass storage device? I don’t get it.
    - icebraining 15y ago
      To copy files to it? Music, documents, videos, etc? Sure, you can use Wifi, but that's slower, more cumbersome and wastes battery life.
      - ugh 15y ago
        Manually? What century is this? Isn’t there a way to sync? That would be strictly preferable to a mass storage device.
        icebraining 15y ago
        No, it wouldn't, exactly because that wouldn't be OS agnostic. And who said anything about it being manual? Mass storage devices can be synced. Mine certainly are.
        ugh 15y ago
        Meh. Just because some geeky stuff is missing doesn’t make WP7 not a great OS. As if anyone cares about Linux.
        cryptoz 15y ago
        1. Plug in. 2. Drag and Drop files. That's geeky? I disagree.
        ugh 15y ago
        That’s a sucky way of transferring stuff. I’m not sure why anyone would want to do that to themselves.
        icebraining 15y ago
        Compared to iTunes on Windows, it's heaven. My mother has an iPod and that thing can't do anything without freezing the UI.
  - sjs 15y ago
    "We’re getting to the point where everything’s a computer in a different form factor. So what, right? So what if it’s built with a computer inside it? It doesn’t matter. It’s, what is it? How do you use it? You know, how does the consumer approach it? And so who cares what’s inside it anymore?" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vc8QXzYQoBY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vc8QXzYQoBY
- majika 15y ago
  > 1. It's a phone, not a mass-storage device. No, I'm sorry. I want to access my files in whatever way I choose. What follows from the lack of mass-storage connectivity is that I can't access my files on a public computer, or a computer that I don't have admin rights over (e.g. computers in my university's labs). To actually defend this restriction is deplorable. It hurts all of us. > 2. Based on my experience, they work pretty well. I'm not going to take your word for it. > 3. Or gmail, twitter, facebook? (although bing kinda annoys me as a default search engine) This sidesteps my point: that Microsoft's online services, which are mostly pretty crap, seem to be the only viable option on WP7. Is this impression correct? I used a WP7 phone for 15 minutes in a store a few months ago, and it seems pretty heavy on MS. Other commenters in this thread have pointed out that Gmail on WP is buggy and lacking in features. Gee, ain't that a coincidence? > 4. Just wait for WP7 userbase to grow. Hah. I've tried this before. In Christmas 2009, I bought a hot new phone on a hot new platform. It was the most innovative phone out at the time. It had the best multitasking (), video calling, great PDF reader, and a great, fast, browser. It had a physical keyboard - which provided all sorts of nice features, like quick access to contacts by typing their names, or shortcut keys in every app. The platform was based on Debian Linux, and allowed native terminal access (i.e., it came rooted), so things like overclocking was a sinch. In fact, save for WebOS, it was the only multitasking phone at the time. But its multitasking is still better than that of Android and iOS today. The phone was the Nokia N900, based on Maemo 5. What happened? Well, the phone sold well, but Maemo eventually died. My phone is now running on a dead platform, and it sucks (apps are suffering bitrot). So, I'm not going down that road again of buying a phone based on future aspirations. Buy what works now, because it's a good indication of what will work later.
recoiledsnake 15y ago
A lot of things on there are the ones that you're missing but not the general public. Just look at the iPhone's success. If you're a Linux type(or MS hater) then these phones are not for you. The rest of the 99% of the planet might consider them. >It's a pity they didn't go with Android, which would give them the freedom to do whatever they want, not needing Google's permission. I would buy a Nokia Android phone in a heartbeat. Android giving them the freedom to do whatever they want? Huh? The source code of a new version is dropped over a wall after their competitor has already released a device with it(if the source is released at all). Android dev is nothing like the Linux kernel dev. Maybe you would know that? Also, Nokia was in talks with Google over Android but Google wouldn't give them many concessions. Your anger should probably be directed at them. And it's not even like you can complain about the lack of options on Linux. There's a ton of Android phones coming out every month, each better in specs than the month previous and they're pretty popular and have loads of apps. What next, you'd buy the iPhone 5 but the only thing stopping you is that it doesn't run Android?
- rbanffy 15y ago
  > If you're a Linux type(or MS hater) Careful. Those are not synonymous. > Nokia was in talks with Google over Android but Google wouldn't give them many concessions. Nokia wouldn't need concessions. Barnes & Noble didn't need the, nor did Amazon. They grabbed the code and used it. Android would be a good choice because a) Nokia could tailor the experience to whatever they wanted b) they already have extensive experience with Linux (and Android is Linux) and c) there is actually a market for Android phones True Microsoft gave them a ton of cash to tip the balance towards WP7. That should also indicate what is actually needed to tip the balance towards making WP7 phones - that, unless US$ 1+ billion is involved, WP7 is not worth it.
  - recoiledsnake 15y ago
    Nokia already proved itself to be inept at making software. Customizing Android and then integrating the source code that Google throws over a wall is not a good move. B&N makes a e-reader which is pretty limited in rival competition and software features. Where's the iReader? Coming to Amazon, they know a few things about software and a laser like focus that Nokia lacks. In fact, the Nokia board specifically recruited a CEO who had experience in managing software companies(Macromedia/MS) just because Nokia was spiraling down because of the software and it was almost too late to right the course without the risk of completely dying. >rue Microsoft gave them a ton of cash to tip the balance towards WP7. That should also indicate what is actually needed to tip the balance towards making WP7 phones - that, unless US$ 1+ billion is involved, WP7 is not worth it. I think it was more about Nokia's need rather than because WP7 sucked as a choice. Regardless of WP7 sucking and Android rocking, Nokia would need to survive 2011 intact, and if making the hardware and writing drivers for WP7 took more than 7 months, what makes you think they can reliably modify Android(a software task that Nokia is weak at) in such a short span of time? Remember, every month that Nokia doesn't have a viable smartphone platform on the shelves, it's bleeding mindshare, marketshare and money to run operations. They were also able to win the right to modify WP7 and get the latest source code before it's throw over a wall by Google after Motorola/Samsung/HTC already have a device on store shelves running it.

rbanffy 15y ago

We can really see it taking over the market any time now...

sjs 15y ago
That's pretty funny. iirc you are a desktop Linux user, right? Do you use it because it's "taking over the market" or because it works well for you?
- rbanffy 15y ago
  I use Linux because it's a flexible, elegant and simple architecture, battle-tested under the most demanding conditions and based on a standard that has almost 40 years of service. Also because it closes any impedance mismatch between my desktop, my phone and the servers that run the code I write. About that, as far as the two markets I am most concerned, phones (we are talking about them, after all) and servers (where I work), Linux already took over the market. WP7, OTOH, was written from scratch because it's predecessor (WinCE/WinMO) was so miserably broken Microsoft really had no choice but starting from scratch.