4 ms·

My thesis is WP8 was already the first huge misstep where they lost developers.

dangus 2y ago
Yeah, the idea that Nadella killed Windows Phone only makes sense in the context of Windows Phone already having failed under Ballmer. I was a Windows Phone user during 8 and 8.1. There was a short period where I felt like some traction was taking place. My bank even had a Windows Phone app, until they didn’t. Windows 8.1 was the most competitive version against contemporaries, but then the delays and issues surrounding 10 really took the wind out of those sails. My perspective as a consumer is that Microsoft buying Nokia seemed to have made Nokia worse and delayed their phone development process. I found myself without any upgrade path, while Apple and Samsung users could get a pretty significant upgrade in capability every year at that time. Nokia was also better at making low-end phones and had very few flagship products that were iPhone and Galaxy competitors. On the business side Microsoft didn’t focus on having their entire lineup available on all four US carriers. They had all these weird carrier exclusives where getting a new Windows Phone would mean switching carriers. I have to think that the break in compatibility between Windows 7 and 8 really screwed over developer relations as well. On the Apple side they were delivering an experience very familiar to Mac developers, and on the Android side the experience was an open source free-for-all playground.
- actionfromafar 2y ago
  That's exactly it. There were a bunch of hardcore Windows dev shops getting ready to support Windows Phone who jumped on WP7, ready to dig down, but who felt betrayed when WP8 was a clean break. You lose that hardcore bunch, then you are just evaluated on the generics and Windows Phone had no edge.
MarkusWandel 2y ago
I tried various "weird phones" on my way to standard Android, among them a high-end WinCE phone (Xperia X1a) and a WP8 one (Lumia 520). Make no mistake about it, WP8 was a good mobile OS, even if they did stick the dreaded "Windows" name in there. Smooth, reliable, battery efficient, well-thought-out UI. But alas, too late. By then Android had captured the "not iOS" market and it would have taken a miracle to bring a third OS to the mainstream. I very briefly tried WP10, and it actually seemed a step backwards; in their desperate attempt to somehow unify the desktop and phone thing, be it in code base or user experience or whatever, they tried too hard.
garaetjjte 2y ago
WP7 was the first misstep with extremely limited API and no native code for apps.
- actionfromafar 2y ago
  Sure, then making WP8 phones incompabitle with WP7 apps was the second misstep. Developers, developers, indeed! Not wanted here.
  - garaetjjte 2y ago
    WP8 was compatible with Silverlight (ie. WP7) apps. The problem was splitting app model into half-abandoned Silverlight and new WinRT, and not providing WP8 upgrade to any WP7 phones.

Yeah, the idea that Nadella killed Windows Phone only makes sense in the context of Windows Phone already having failed under Ballmer. I was a Windows Phone user during 8 and 8.1. There was a short period where I felt like some traction was taking place. My bank even had a Windows Phone app, until they didn’t. Windows 8.1 was the most competitive version against contemporaries, but then the delays and issues surrounding 10 really took the wind out of those sails. My perspective as a consumer is that Microsoft buying Nokia seemed to have made Nokia worse and delayed their phone development process. I found myself without any upgrade path, while Apple and Samsung users could get a pretty significant upgrade in capability every year at that time. Nokia was also better at making low-end phones and had very few flagship products that were iPhone and Galaxy competitors. On the business side Microsoft didn’t focus on having their entire lineup available on all four US carriers. They had all these weird carrier exclusives where getting a new Windows Phone would mean switching carriers. I have to think that the break in compatibility between Windows 7 and 8 really screwed over developer relations as well. On the Apple side they were delivering an experience very familiar to Mac developers, and on the Android side the experience was an open source free-for-all playground.

actionfromafar 2y ago
That's exactly it. There were a bunch of hardcore Windows dev shops getting ready to support Windows Phone who jumped on WP7, ready to dig down, but who felt betrayed when WP8 was a clean break. You lose that hardcore bunch, then you are just evaluated on the generics and Windows Phone had no edge.

MarkusWandel 2y ago

I tried various "weird phones" on my way to standard Android, among them a high-end WinCE phone (Xperia X1a) and a WP8 one (Lumia 520). Make no mistake about it, WP8 was a good mobile OS, even if they did stick the dreaded "Windows" name in there. Smooth, reliable, battery efficient, well-thought-out UI. But alas, too late. By then Android had captured the "not iOS" market and it would have taken a miracle to bring a third OS to the mainstream. I very briefly tried WP10, and it actually seemed a step backwards; in their desperate attempt to somehow unify the desktop and phone thing, be it in code base or user experience or whatever, they tried too hard.

garaetjjte 2y ago

WP7 was the first misstep with extremely limited API and no native code for apps.

actionfromafar 2y ago
Sure, then making WP8 phones incompabitle with WP7 apps was the second misstep. Developers, developers, indeed! Not wanted here.
- garaetjjte 2y ago
  WP8 was compatible with Silverlight (ie. WP7) apps. The problem was splitting app model into half-abandoned Silverlight and new WinRT, and not providing WP8 upgrade to any WP7 phones.