3 ms·

Since they started developing Windows Phone? It's a little obvious, but why not study the design decisions of your competitors? Especially when it reveals ineff

• nextparadigms 15y ago
  And they thought they should just share it with the world? Please. This is just more of Microsoft's FUD tactics to attack competitors in a dirty way. They were also the ones to pay for that research that uncovered the first Chrome sandbox exploit. I question their motives for all of this.
  • shantanubala 15y ago
    That's my point. Microsoft has nothing to lose by researching the inefficiencies of their competitors. It's a pretty good business tactic if you have enough money to spare, and since they started developing Windows Phone, it makes even more sense for them to uncover "problems" with Android.
  • wmf 15y ago
    This paper was written by an intern at MSR. It's possible that it was easier to instrument Android or it has more apps or whatever.
• CurtHagenlocher 15y ago
  You haven't actually read the paper, have you?
  • shantanubala 15y ago
    No, I've only read articles about it, so I definitely can't make a definite judgment about the quality of the research. But assuming journalists aren't misrepresenting the facts (which may or may not be a good assumption in this situation), it seems fairly obvious that Microsoft has a vested interest in developing a better phone operating system. Their intentions weren't necessarily nefarious, but I doubt they funded this purely for the sake of science. It's in their best interest to study cell phone efficiency, and it's in their best interest to study their competitor's phones. That just seemed like an obvious conclusion, but is there something in the actual paper that indicates anything different?