×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

LG's Windows Phone 7 Series Early Prototype

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 4 years ago | from the early-always-tastes-better dept.

Cellphones 103

suraj.sun writes to tell us that Engadget got an early look at the new Windows Phone 7 series early prototype (and included a video). "The QWERTY slider is the first branded Windows Phone 7 Series device the world's ever seen, and while the hardware and software are both obviously early, we can tell you a few things about it: it's just a hair thicker than an iPhone or Nexus One, there are dedicated hardware camera, volume, and power buttons in addition to the back, home, and search buttons dictated by Windows Phone 7 Series, and we noticed a five megapixel camera with a flash on the back, along with a headphone jack. Can't say much apart from that right now, since things are so early and everything is subject to change, but things are certainly moving along."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

103 comments

This is News? (0, Redundant)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 4 years ago | (#31315856)

Can't say much apart from that right now, since things are so early and everything is subject to change...

Barely a thing is known yet this makes it to the front page of Slashdot? I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, yet somehow I am...

Re:This is News? (3, Insightful)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316102)

FAR less information than this, routinely gets posted in the Apple section.

Re:This is News? (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31324066)

Indeed - the equivalent Apple story would be about a mere rumour of a new phone, based on some idle speculation on a non-notable blog, claiming he'd noticed Apple were ordering in some new electronic equipment from some far off country...

And we'd get that story posted everyday, for the next three months.

LG have vastly more market share in the phone market than Apple - yet when was the last time we had a story on them? Compared with daily ones for the Iphone...

Another miss (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31315944)

I've not seen a lot of the Win 7 Mobile UI but what I have seen suggests that Microsoft can't quite bring themselves to abandon desktop Windows style design elements in favor of things more appropriate to the small screen of a handheld.

This [lukew.com] sums it up well. If you put those same screenshots next to an Android phone you'd have the same result. Win 7 Mobile wastes a lot of space and spends a lot of time looking whizzy, without really accomplishing anything. Animating every action was forgivable 10 years ago in bad powerpoint presentations. It isn't any longer.

Re:Another miss (3, Interesting)

Hijacked Public (999535) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316048)

That link is being gone over [edwardtufte.com] on Edward Tufte's site, although I wouldn't expect Tufte to have any love for anything Microsoft.

I played with a prototype windows 7 phone about a month ago and they are using the paradigm of making the desktop larger than the screen almost everywhere and it is incredibly annoying.

Re:Another miss (2, Interesting)

r_naked (150044) | more than 4 years ago | (#31317628)

When I first saw the new WinMo 7 interface, I thought that the UI was chopping off parts of words because it wasn't finished, or wasn't quite designed for the phone they were demonstrating it on. Now that I know that is how they WANT it to look, this has fail written all over it. It is ugly and cluttered, and given that this was *supposedly* a ground up re-write, I don't know WHAT they were thinking.

Bottom line, this sucks. There are 4 (maybe 5) major "smartphone" players:

Apple - iPhone - I have one, and I LOVE it as long as I can keep it jailbroken. But every new firmware release Apple wants to make it harder.

Google - Android - Google had a good idea, but the potential downfall of that good idea has come to fruition -- market fragmentation. I won't be getting an Android phone until I am sure that things will become(remain?) stable.

RIM - Blackberry - A couple of problems with these for me. 1 - They are mainly business phones, and therefore not my forte. 2 - I *like* the touch interface, and RIM doesn't have a decent Blackberry with a touch interface.

Microsoft - WinMo series - It wasn't until WinMo 6.5 that they *finally* got an OK touch only interface. I don't want to have to use a pointer to use my phone. Unfortunately there is still a lot of software that needs that pointer -- so MS came out with WinMo 7, with no backwards compatibility (that has been seen yet -- and I don't think there will be any), but the interface is aweful even for alphaware.

Palm - Pre - This was my "maybe" 5th contender. Palm has a great phone here IMHO, however, they haven't released a GSM version, so it is useless to me. People in other marker areas may hate AT&T, but in the market I am in I can consistently get 2.5megs/sec down and never have a dropped call. So, until Palm releases a Pre for AT&T, they are useless to me.

Re:Another miss (4, Insightful)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31318586)

Aren't you forgetting about Symbian?...

You know, that smarthpone OS which almost has more marketshare than all the platforms you mentioned, combined...

Nokia avoids key markets. (2, Insightful)

WiiVault (1039946) | more than 4 years ago | (#31319250)

The thing about Symbian is that it really isn't a "global" player despite having a large marketshare. No matter what you think about the US it is a primary source of SW development as well as hype and branding. Nokia for some unknown reason has essentially abandoned the American market starting about 5 years ago. You can find them here and there but back in the day everybody owned a Nokia. Today it just simply isn't on the radar of Americans or more importantly the significant American software and services companies. You won't for instance ever see a Nokia featured in American TV or films. The smartphone industry is in many ways a popularity contest ignoring a significant market, especially one as culturally influential as the US is just plain dumb. Hopefully they will smarten up but until then the hype and interested will be on RIM, Apple, and Google. Mindshare is powerfull stuff.

Nokia wasn't allowed in one market (3, Insightful)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31319474)

First - yeah, US market is important but...don't overestimate its importance in relation to the rest of the world. It's quite atypical market. Look how well Nokia is doing in the rest of the world anyway, with them being the only major cellphone manufacturer that's very profitable (others are either out of the market, struggling financially, or mobile phones are far from vast majority of their business; RIM might be an exception - though do they sell phones or corporate/carrier service?)

Secondly, it's not much of a mystery why Nokia isn't really present in the US - several years ago (when mobiles really started becoming more than voice + sms) it refused excessive castration of its phones, which was demanded by US cellphone carriers...and there you go.

Re:Nokia wasn't allowed in one market (1)

Miamicanes (730264) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323512)

>> several years ago (when mobiles really started becoming more than voice + sms)
>> it refused excessive castration of its phones,

Er, actually, it was more because none of Nokia's phones could do EDGE, none of Nokia's phones could do 3G UMTS on AT&T's 850/1900 uplink/downlink frequencies, and T-Mobile had no 3G UMTS network at all until about 18 months ago. As a result, Nokia's higher-end phones were useless GPRS paperweights in America. Ditto, for Canada (Rogers uses the same frequencies as AT&T). EDGE isn't FAST, but GPRS is so painfully slow, it's a borderline human-rights violation (basically, the difference between 9600 baud dialup and 128k ISDN).

Re:Nokia wasn't allowed in one market (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323820)

What are you talking about? The first EDGE phone in the world, Nokia 6200 (launched 2002), had also AT&T as its launch carrier. The first 3G phone in the world, Nokia 6650, launched at the beginning of 2003...with version for US market/frequencies, 6651, soon after.

Re:Nokia wasn't allowed in one market (1)

Miamicanes (730264) | more than 4 years ago | (#31325794)

> What are you talking about? The first EDGE phone in the world, Nokia 6200
> (launched 2002), had also AT&T as its launch carrier.

OK, let me rephrase that. None of their high-end PDA phones, starting sometime around 2005, seemed to support EDGE or AT&T's UMTS frequencies. I was told point blank by a group of Nokia evangelists right around the time their first internet tablet came out that none of their flagship phones available at that point could do anything besides GPRS in America. Some casual googling suggests it might have been due to a lawsuit between Nokia and Qualcomm that Nokia lost. I'm semi-guessing that it had something to do with either supporting EDGE and UMTS on the same chip, or maybe the ability to use UMTS when available, but fall back to EDGE automatically. In any case, they vanished from America almost overnight, so completely and thoroughly that more than a few Americans actually think they went out of business.

Apple avoids most markets (2, Informative)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31324128)

*yawn* Pro-Apple tactic #434 - redefine "market share" to mean something else.

Not to mention that you confuse yourself. If you want to say that it's only the US market that matters (obviously I'm irrelevant, here in the UK), that's all very well, but you start off by saying they're not a global player. Which is it? Globally, Nokia are the market leader, by far. Globally, Apple are behind Nokia, LG, Samsung, Motorola, and RIM.

But even if we're talking only of the US, let's see some citations on market share for the entire mobile market (i.e., not some ill-defined "smartphone" market which artifically resticts the market to the Iphone and a few other handpicked devices)?

You won't for instance ever see a Nokia featured in American TV or films.

So Nokia don't use product placement as advertising on American TV. Big deal. Maybe they don't need to.

Mindshare is powerfull stuff.

By "Mindshare", you mean "What I think is best". Well I think different to you.

Re:Another miss (2, Informative)

rsborg (111459) | more than 4 years ago | (#31320168)

Aren't you forgetting about Symbian?... You know, that smarthpone OS which almost has more marketshare than all the platforms you mentioned, combined...

The GP poster is clearly from the USA as he refers to AT&T being his preferred provider. According to Wikipedia, Symbian smartphone marketshare in the USA lags others

Symbian has the largest share in most markets worldwide, but lags behind other companies in the relatively small but highly visible North American market.

Furthermore, it's not actually clear that Nokia smartphones are even sold by providers here, meaning they're at a disadvantage due to the consumer having to pay full price for the handset + the normal subscription rates and contract duration.

Why not, everyone else has... (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#31320776)

Aren't you forgetting about Symbian?...

You know, that smarthpone OS which almost has more marketshare than all the platforms you mentioned, combined...

Only just.

But I would argue that Symbian can hardly be included in the list since it's not really a part of the smartphone application race in any significant way.

The difference between Symbian and all other competitors on the list is, most people buy a phone that happens to have Symbian running it, whereas for Android or the iPhone or Pre or WM, people buy a device specifically because it runs that OS.

Even thinking about the people that buy something really advanced like the N900, how many people are really buying it because of Symbian vs. just buying it for the specific feature set it ships with?

We should see Nokia devices start to ship with Android in a year or two, once they give up the alternate path they are taking now.

Re:Why not, everyone else has... (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321022)

But that's a distinction not that dissimilar to the ones between OSes in PC world - you have small minority choosing Apple, small minority choosing Linux (and similar alternatives) but "unwashed masses" get a PC that happens to have Windows running it; manufacturer of which is quite successfull if you ask me...

Oh, and in case of Nokia they actually play very nice; I don't really see in which area they haven't earned their success (nvm great service they are doing for humanity)

Do you seriously think that Nokia will abandon the three most succesfull mobile phone platforms in the world, in their respective segments? (S30, S40, Symbian) Platforms that people continually choose to get instead of the alternatives...otherwise Nokia wouldn't dominate that much. Their path, platforms aren't an "alternative". They are or almost are (depending on the segment) majority of the market. And now Symbian gets a nice overhaul, built around Qt and all that...

PS. And N900 is not Symbian!

Re:Why not, everyone else has... (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322782)

But that's a distinction not that dissimilar to the ones between OSes in PC world - you have small minority choosing Apple, small minority choosing Linux (and similar alternatives) but "unwashed masses" get a PC that happens to have Windows running it; manufacturer of which is quite successfull if you ask me...

They are successful because people write tons of software for Windows.

But here you have a totally different situation. Almost no-one is writing Symbian applications, even though as you say it's the most-present platform. To me that indicates more a miscategorization than anything, or at the very least indicates that long term Symbian will certainly not retain that market share. Windows wouldn't stay on top forever either if no new software was ever written for it.

Re:Why not, everyone else has... (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323456)

Though IMHO saying "almost no-one is writing Symbian applications" is a bit of a stretch. Ovi store has quite a bit of them; Symbian also nicely runs tons of j2me apps. Plus...I think you overestimate the importance of vast, vast number of apps. How many Windows apps are actually widely used? How come Debian isn't the most succesfull OS with its repositories? How many apps on Apple AppStore (or generally) are junk? There's some point of balance there, with the pure number of apps not being the only indication.

(accidentally, some nice Symbian apps are not and will not be available on, say, iPhone)

There might be indeed some...well, I wouldn't call it miscategorization; more of a misunderstanding, or outright dismissal of what Symbian even is - I'm pretty certain many of its users don't know what it trully can do. That might be a side effect of Symbian (at least in Nokia flavour, S60) having similar UI concepts to S40; for familiarity and because S60 started a long time ago, when such UI was the only practical one. Or that Symbian handsets are often very affordable, so they are treated as just another solid handset. But is that a bad thing? How many people choose Windows and, to some degree, OSX on basis of full understanding of its merits?

I do agree that Symbian will probably lose its marketshare in the long term - it's hard to remain at 50% (while playing nice) when there's so much new competition entering the market (and that's a good thing). Actually, I believe in the past year it slipped from 51 to 48%...while continuing healthy grow in number of devices sold. Here's the crux of the matter: with smartphones as a group still being only a small portion (20%?) of total phones sold, there's plenty of opportunity for everywhone. And Symbian has properties which will help it in the biggest market segment, where price is of paramount importance - it can nicely run on significantly cheaper phones than most (all?) of its competition. Phones which will benefit in many places from brand loyalty towards their manufacturer.

With the ongoing shift towards Qt, it will probably become a very pleasurable enviroment for writing apps, too...

PS. BTW, what you would call "miscategorization" seems rampant in mobile phone industry. For example, why Sony Ericsson "feature phones" (the ones on their own platform) are not smartphones? They have multimedia features, proper connectivity, even full multitasking of installed apps...something certain smartphones can't do. Before you say their apps aren't really native (j2me) - well, some of the build-in apps are also j2me; besides such thing didn't stop WebOS or Android from being called smartphone OSes before they got native code execution. And where are the cheap Android phones? (without contract...)

Re:Why not, everyone else has... (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31324226)

Almost no-one is writing Symbian applications

Citation please? (And please, not one that only looks at "app" stores - the point is that we aren't restricted to an "app" store.) Plenty of apps for my phone. I can also use any Java application too - if you see more things specifically written for the Iphone, it's only because they've had to accommodate the awkward player that can't handle 15 year old technologies.

Re:Why not, everyone else has... (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31324204)

But I would argue that Symbian can hardly be included in the list since it's not really a part of the smartphone application race in any significant way.

Not a smartphone? What definition of "smartphone" are you using that includes phones like the Iphones (can't even multitask; first versions couldn't even copy and paste for heaven's sake - did they fix that yet?), but doesn't include Symbian?

The difference between Symbian and all other competitors on the list is, most people buy a phone that happens to have Symbian running it, whereas for Android or the iPhone or Pre or WM, people buy a device specifically because it runs that OS.

And your evidence for this wild speculation? And why does it matter anyway? People buy it because Nokia make good phones - hardware is just as important.

We should see Nokia devices start to ship with Android in a year or two, once they give up the alternate path they are taking now.

Citation please? And even if they did, Nokia will still be the market leader, both in phones, and so-called "smartphones". The OP was talking about ""smartphone" players", and then proceeded to list companies, not operating system. It doesn't matter whether Nokia use their own OS or someone else's, they're still a major smartphone player - the biggest, in fact.

But then, the OP also missed a whole load of other smartphone players too, such as LG (as covered in this article) and Motorola, both of whom have more marketshare than Apple, by far.

Re:Another miss (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31318608)

You Americans can say you don't like it, but dismissing Symbian as a "major smartphone player" when it holds almost half of the global market is ridiculous. Putting WebOS and its tiny representation before Symbian borders on stupid.

Perhaps you just forgot about it, since Nokia won't bend over, open their ass and say "please" for the US carriers like the others do.

Re:Another miss (1)

r_naked (150044) | more than 4 years ago | (#31319080)

Two things:

1 - Why would I care about "global" market share when I live in the US? I only care about phones that I can buy and use here. Is that hard to comprehend? I have no idea why Nokia doesn't have more of a market presence in the US, but again, it doesn't matter to me.

2 - Nokia puts Symbian OS on ALL their phones. So while it may be a "smartphone OS", installing it on barebones basic hardware doesn't make it a "smartphone"...

Re:Another miss (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31319806)

1 - uhmm, but you can buy them just fine - they just weren't promoted at all by carriers, that's all. Not only some US carriers have them; with Nokia you can easily truly own your phone and pick a contract/prepaid that's really a good deal (ok, that last thing might a problem in the US too...)

2 - that is completelly untrue. Symbian does NOT constitute most of Nokia sales. S30 and S40 (the most popular mobile phone platform on the planet) are NOT Symbian; the latter is only a small portion of Nokia sales.
Perhaps you not realising that is one of the reasons why you think Nokia is not as big as it really is.

Re:Another miss (1)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 4 years ago | (#31320186)

Any device which you can install general purpose software (including deep, kernel level things on Symbian) and multi task is a smart phone.

If a future Symbian^3 or ^4 device does come with sub $100 price tag can do whatever my Nokia E71 can do, pity for me, I hurried. It doesn't change the fact that an army (100M+ devices/year) of devices, coming with Qt 4.x+ is on the way and if you are a developer who dismisses this _fact_ just because it isn't mentioned on your trendy web 2.0 sites, you are really missing something.

Barebones basic (and cheap!) device running a multi tasking/modern/qt based OS is a damn big deal, it can compare to Apple's situation when first OEM PC with Microsoft DOS shipped. We have all seen what happened later.

Re:Another miss (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31320546)

I don't think you have much reason to, uhm...pity yourself ;)

Symbian^3 devices (in affordable price range) are generally a thing for end of 2010, at the earliest.

Re:Another miss (1)

gameozymandias (1757012) | more than 4 years ago | (#31320204)

Microsoft - WinMo series - It wasn't until WinMo 6.5 that they *finally* got an OK touch only interface. I don't want to have to use a pointer to use my phone. Unfortunately there is still a lot of software that needs that pointer -- so MS came out with WinMo 7, with no backwards compatibility (that has been seen yet -- and I don't think there will be any), but the interface is aweful even for alphaware.

Why do you think the WP7 interface is awful? Love to hear some specifics... I'm sure I'll be considered biased since I work for MS, but I'm a huge fan of the new UI. And that's from someone who bought an iPhone day one... and haven't found anything better (including Android) until the Windows Phone announce. Personally, I think the user-centric model MS has built, surfacing useful information from apps at a higher, hub level, is a nice step forward. Thoughts? Love to hear some specifics on why you dislike it...

Re:Another miss (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31320742)

PS. PS. Also, you left out Samsung bada OS. Yes, it's unreleased as of yet - but launching in two months, and with the stated goal of shipping on "significant portion" of Samsung mobile phones; I guess they want to ship it on everything except from the most basic devices.

It will be big (I suspect quite quickly second only to Symbian) for one simple reason: Samsung is second only to Nokia in marketshare, and significantly ahead of the rest.

Re:Another miss (1)

SpryGuy (206254) | more than 4 years ago | (#31320856)

I think you need to differentiate between "awful" and just "different".

The "cutting off" of UI elements is a cue that there is more stuff to the right, making it far more intuitive and discoverable to swipe over to see the extra content.

It's actually not a bad design at all.

And the animations themselves give cues to what is going on and "where" you are going in the UI, as well as cues about how to get back (though a dedicated back button really helps out here).

It remains to be seen how well it works in real-world usage, and there are a lot of unanswered questions left, but so far I don't see anything that is truly "awful" about the UI, personally.

Re:Another miss (2, Informative)

radish (98371) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322682)

On the other hand, I think it's the best looking Smartphone UI out there, bar none. I hate Android (and hate even more the fragmentation and inconsistency brought by mods like Blur), Blackberry is yawn inducing and the iPhone is starting to look a little long in the tooth. The Pre is nice but I'll be honest - I've never used it in person so can't really comment. From sheer visual appeal though - WinMo7 wins for me.

I've played with a Zune HD (which WinMo7 is based on) and it's great - really nice to use and it looks fantastic. This, to me, is as "wow" as iPhone was the first time I saw it.

Personal opinion, taste, YMMV, etc.

Re:Another miss (1)

jo42 (227475) | more than 4 years ago | (#31318040)

Actually, when you think about it, having the display be a window into a larger desktop is perfect for the current attention deficit generation. It will keep their attention occupied, scrolling all over the place looking at and for stuff. When they forget something they saw half a second ago, they will scroll back around some more to find it. I can see this type of UI keeping them occupied for tens of minutes at a time.

Re:Another miss (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31318552)

More generally, this UI might end up not much different from current "good" WinMob experience. Specifically - those implementations which put nice, polished homescreen with basic apps on top.

Yes, the basic experience might be nice. But 3rd party apps don't fit. With WinMob7 the situation might be better, after all every implementation will, supposedly, have the same UI paradigm/homescreen...but I don't really see how MS can enforce (with that kind of UI) solid, consistant, easy to follow / forced upon UI guidelines. Getting nice UI will be mostly about tinkering by hand. MS can pull that off with homescreen and their apps. Many of the 3rd poarty devs - not really.

Maybe a win? (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 4 years ago | (#31317168)

Win 7 Mobile wastes a lot of space and spends a lot of time looking whizzy...

Fair enough, but maybe LG have finally learned a lesson from users' complaints: namely that the only difference between LG's own software and a bucket of shit is the bucket. If they can find anybody else's software to use, it's highly likely to be an improvement.

I have had many LG appliances, including phones, TV and a HDD PVR. The hardware is in some cases quite good (with a big exception that is off-topic in this discussion), but it is seriously badly let down by the shitty quality of their software.

Re:Another miss (1)

gtall (79522) | more than 4 years ago | (#31317718)

Why was the parent modded down? Simply not agreeing with the sentiments is not a good reason.

It must be in contract terms :) (1)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 4 years ago | (#31320228)

I think the contractor/gray PR company who is involved in spamming all web 2.0 sites also have idling slashdot mod accounts and modding down all the messages comes with the price.

MS can't admit their huge mistakes like Nokia did and they think, polishing the clunky UI, bribing IT departments and abusing sites will "fix" the situation.

Unfortunately, it may work.

Solid Clock Display (0, Troll)

yumyum (168683) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316066)

Looks like MS nailed it.

Re:Solid Clock Display (1)

End Program (963207) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316432)

I would say if it is half as popular as the Zune, Microsoft has nothing to worry about.

Re:Solid Clock Display (5, Insightful)

Akido37 (1473009) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316494)

I would say if it is half as popular as the Zune, Microsoft has nothing to worry about.

If it's half as popular as Zune, Google/Apple/Nokia/Palm/etc have nothing to worry about.

Re:Solid Clock Display (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 4 years ago | (#31317220)

I would say if it is half as popular as the Zune, Microsoft has nothing to worry about.

If it's TWICE as popular as the Zune, Microsoft still has nothing to worry about. :-)

Re:Solid Clock Display (1)

talz13 (884474) | more than 4 years ago | (#31317574)

I would say if it is half as popular as the Zune, Microsoft has nothing to worry about. If it's TWICE as popular as the Zune, Microsoft still has nothing to worry about. :-)

If it's TWICE as popular as the Zune, Google/Apple/Nokia/Palm/etc still have nothing to worry about. :-)

Do not want! (3, Funny)

Twigmon (1095941) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316072)

Well... I would like that phone with android installed on it ;)

Re:Do not want! (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31316468)

Android hit the nail on the head when it comes to device usability.

The programming structure that allows applications to easily call parts of other applications has delivered what I see as unprecedented inter-connectivity between mobile applications, which has increased mobile productivity for me on a personal level.

Example: I was out of town and looking for a Bank of America ATM. BoA has a mobile application for online banking that allows me to do all the usual things that I can do from my computer (see balances, transactions, do transfers between accounts, etc).

The application also had a location search. The application was able to grab my position from GPS and do a search for ATMs nearest to that location, display the results within the application using an instance of google maps. From there, I was able to select navigation and was asked if I wanted to complete the action using google navigation or telenav.

That type of action with start-to-finish prompting and inclusion from the device is the new standard in mobile usability as far as I'm concerned. Not too long ago I would have had to find the location online and type it into my navigation application manually, and depending on previous device the online search may have been quite tedious.

Now from what I've seen, WP7S seems to take that idea to the Nth degree, with a slick interface designed around that level of mobile productivity and usability.

I love the android platform, especially its "open-ness" (the degree of which varies depending on which device manufacturer and mobile network provider you go with), but I am certainly willing to reserve my judgment of WP7S until I can go hands-on with a device.

Holiday season this year will be interesting as my carrier (sprint) was listed as a launch partner for WP7S, and also looks to be launching an amazing 4.3" screen/1ghz processor android phone, both just as my upgrade comes up. I want the android phone, but I also want to see what WP7S has to offer before I make any decisions.

Re:Do not want! (0, Troll)

rufus t firefly (35399) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316688)

I'd think that Microsoft is playing the "pay attention to me again! see, another release!" card, in hopes that they won't become obsolete in that computing space. Windows Mobile has been a crapfest for virtually every release, taking a GUI which really shouldn't work on a small device and shoehorning it in.

Forget openness, forget any sort of accountability. They're going to show you just enough to get you to theoretically throw down your heathen iPhones and Android devices and come home to Papa Ballmer, and then they'll abandon work on their platform. Again.

I've seen enough of Microsoft's mobile offerings and vendor lockin to know to stay the hell away from any phone with the Windows logo on it.

Re:Do not want! (1)

toadlife (301863) | more than 4 years ago | (#31320748)

I don't think Microsoft's problem has ever been about the power of the underlying platform. What you just described has been easy to do (from a programming standpoint) in Windows Mobile for ages and there are several apps on my phone that are very location aware.

Setting aside them not being able to bring a touch friendly interface to WinMo fast enough, Microsoft's problem is that they assumed that their favorable position in the business phone market would magically carry over into the personal smart phone market. They completely dropped the ball when it came to marketing and marketing agreements. When my phone (T-Mo Touch Pro 2) came out in August T-Mobile was advertising their Android phones on TV 24x7. The only mention of the touch pro 2 was a measly little press release on their website. To this day, the touch pro 2 has never appeared on the front of T-mobile's website, and just recently, months after it's release in August, I saw the first TV advertisement for the touch pro 2. My guess is that Google had an agreement with T-Mo regarding advertising and the WinMo phones were barred from being advertised up until recently. It was so bad when the phone was released that even the T-Mo reps did not know about the touch pro 2 when it came out.

Everyone who I know who owns an iPhone or Android thinks my TP2 is a cool phone and in every case, they had no idea it even existed before I showed it to them. Just yesterday, I showed some guy who owned a Mytouch 3G my TP2 and he thought it was awesome phone. He assumed it was another android phone, and when I told him it ran "Windows Mobile" he was shocked - he had no idea there were Phones that ran "Windows", and the concept of a phone running Windows was not a negative thing to him.

I personally thought the whole "Windows Phone" brand was a lame move, but apparently the name "Windows" does not carry bad connotations outside of the Slashdot crowd.

Anyhow, it will interesting to see how the release of Windows Phone 7 plays out. Microsoft has dug itself a massive hole.

Re:Do not want! (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 4 years ago | (#31317216)

xda-developers.com seem to have many guys porting Android to many WM devices.

I'm watching the Android on HTC Touch Diamond 2 (Topaz, Fuse to US folks) keenly.

Yeah, about the software (0, Flamebait)

pete-wilko (628329) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316270)

The whole point of interest in this story should be the phone's OS - win 7 mobile - as that's the novelty. Instead we get a friggin hardware rundown. So what? The text from TFA is the same as the blurb, save yourself a page click till there is some actual interesting useful information there. The video is also next to useless, half of it is looking at the phone turned off. Reminds me why I don't read engadget.

Re:Yeah, about the software (2, Informative)

ircmaxell (1117387) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316900)

The hardware rundown even sounds identical to the Motorola Droid (Hardware keyboard, volume rocker, power button, camera button, 5mp camera, flash)... Not saying that it's an uncommon configuration, but given that they compared it to the iPhone and NexusOne, what about comparing it to the other flagship Android device (the one that's the most popular in the USA)?

Re:Yeah, about the software (1)

pete-wilko (628329) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322944)

That was the point I was going for. No idea why the mods have moderated my initial post as flamebait - makes no sense. As you say, was highlighting that the specs are the same as many phones out there - im genuinely interested in how win 7 mobile plays out - but this article offers nothing at all on that. Meh, meta-moderation is a great thing ;)

Re:Yeah, about the software (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31324290)

Indeed. It's probably because the media honestly think the mobile market consists of Apple and Google (despite them actually being two of the smallest players, way behind LG and Motorola). I suppose we should be thankful they cover LG at all...

Re:Yeah, about the software (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31317572)

FLAMEBAIT?? Some annoyed windows fanboi is annoyed clearly. Wasn't even MS critical!

Worst. Name. Ever. (4, Insightful)

Eponymous Coward (6097) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316278)

Who names this stuff? Windows Phone 7 Series? Microsoft has virtually unlimited resources. How can their marketing be so awful?

Re:Worst. Name. Ever. (5, Insightful)

NEDHead (1651195) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316388)

Let us consider: Microsoft is normally ridiculed for inferior products, yet frequently has dominant market share. So how is Microsoft marketing a failure?

Monopoly means... (2, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316698)

Let us consider: Microsoft is normally ridiculed for inferior products, yet frequently has dominant market share. So how is Microsoft marketing a failure?

Because Monopoly means you don't necessarily have to market (or market well), most customers are forced to come to you, like it or not.

For instance, there are still a fair number of people that MUST have Windows Mobile phones because that is what the corporation will buy for them.

Re:Monopoly means... (3, Informative)

copponex (13876) | more than 4 years ago | (#31318848)

For instance, there are still a fair number of people that MUST have Windows Mobile phones because that is what the corporation will buy for them.

Do you know of any other vendor that offers enterprise grade solutions for the same price point?

As time goes on, I'm sure we'll see a few corporations on Linux / Android, or OS X Server / iPhone, but for now, the best option for ROI is Windows and its derivatives.

Did I say anything negative? (0, Troll)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#31319170)

Do you know of any other vendor that offers enterprise grade solutions for the same price point?

That is basically just repeating what I said. "There are still a fair number of people that MUST have Windows Mobile phones because that is what the corporation will buy for them."

I didn't say it was good or bad. It is just fact.

And that is why poor marketing doesn't matter.

However, I'm not sure that particular fact will help Windows 7 - it seems like they are keeping 6.5 around (rebranded "Classic") for business phone use, while Windows 7 Series Mobile Edition (sorry if I got a few words out of order, I simply cannot remember the exact sequence) is targeted directly at consumers. I'm not sure most enterprises would be keen on a company mobile device having such good Live integration... however that may push IT to support other phones because, hey, who wants to be stuck with WM 6.5 when there are a world of more advanced phones out there? Executives will not put up with that BS.

Re:Did I say anything negative? (1)

copponex (13876) | more than 4 years ago | (#31320126)

I didn't say it was good or bad. It is just fact.

Earlier you said

Monopoly means you don't necessarily have to market (or market well) most customers are forced to come to you, like it or not.

Microsoft maintains their monopoly through a certain amount of shady business practices, but also because there is no enterprise competition to speak of. If Apple dropped their prices, or if the Linux community could settle on a cohesive set of basic standards, Microsoft could possibly lose their monopoly. Just because Microsoft is the only place you can buy Windows and Office doesn't make them a monopoly. If they somehow worked out a deal to outlaw other software, then I think you would have a more valid argument. (And yes, I have no doubt that Microsoft would love to, and would try to implement, such an idea.)

who wants to be stuck with WM 6.5 when there are a world of more advanced phones out there? Executives will not put up with that BS

Executives only care about being reliably connected to their information. The Blackberry is probably the worst device I have ever used, except for one feature: e-mail. It's always on, works well internationally, and their business devices have very type-able keyboards.

Re:Did I say anything negative? (1)

dave562 (969951) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322864)

If Apple dropped their prices

Apple needs more than a price drop to compete in enterprise space. They need a lot of developers and a good number of years to come up with worthwhile application stack that speaks to the business market. I doubt they will ever go there. As Apple fans are fond of saying, "You aren't Apple's target market." Apple's target market seems to be consumers with extra cash to spend, and consumers who want a reliable, consumer based computing experience. They don't care about ERP or CRM or IT.

Executives only care about being reliably connected to their information. The Blackberry is probably the worst device I have ever used, except for one feature: e-mail. It's always on, works well internationally, and their business devices have very type-able keyboards.

You got it mostly right. I'd suggest that a reliable Calendar is of equal importance to email. As soon as you make the jump from "doing things" to "meeting with and giving direction to people who do things", that calendar becomes very important.

RIM (1)

WiiVault (1039946) | more than 4 years ago | (#31319334)

I would argue that RIM offers a better deal to many organizations as opposed to MS. In my experience Blackberry deployment has almost always been smoother than WinMo.

Re:RIM (1)

Mike Buddha (10734) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322918)

In my experience Blackberry deployment has almost always been smoother than WinMo.

Yeah, until the next worldwide Blackberry email outage.

Windows mobile exist thanks to ignorance of IT guy (1)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 4 years ago | (#31320068)

Unless IT guys get bribed by MS or they are plain stupid/ignorant, there are very very good solutions to access Exhange/MS servers on Blackberry and Symbian. In fact, Symbian ones come free in general.

Of course, having met a "Windows server" admin lately, I am not sure how will that idiot who recently forced an entire office to XP Pro from XP Home because he misunderstood a KB article will look for such solutions.

RIM enjoys a similar ignorance too, it is not widely known that most Symbian phones will happily logon to their infrastructure mostly for free. I am not talking about some garage software which uses reverse engineered things. Absolutely licensed/proprietary code.

Re:Windows mobile exist thanks to ignorance of IT (1)

dave562 (969951) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322920)

Unless IT guys get bribed by MS or they are plain stupid/ignorant, there are very very good solutions to access Exhange/MS servers on Blackberry and Symbian. In fact, Symbian ones come free in general.

Don't forget that Apple finally got on the bandwagon and licensing Active Sync from Microsoft. Now the iPhone seamlessly syncs with Exchange mail, calendar and tasks. If I weren't such a purist and attached to the keyboard on my Blackberry, I'd consider an iPhone.

Re:Monopoly means... (1)

Skuld-Chan (302449) | more than 4 years ago | (#31320206)

I dunno - I actually like MS-Windows, it has a nice interface, its fast and its stable. I've had a lot of Macs (through work no less) I never found the UI to be that efficient unless you knew all the gestures and tricks. On face value its a lot more cumbersome to me (again - this is a PERSONAL preference!).

I swore up and down though I'd never buy another Windows Mobile phone - for the exact same reasons. Horrible UI, slow, and why should I have to reboot my phone every day? I actually like my Symbian phone better - although I'm going to switch to an Android phone soon (for the same reasons actually :)).

I don't think Monopoly plays into my choice at all. I bought it because I liked it, but feel free to explain why I'm wrong.

Re:Worst. Name. Ever. (1, Insightful)

rufus t firefly (35399) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316710)

Let us consider: Microsoft is normally ridiculed for inferior products, yet frequently has dominant market share. So how is Microsoft marketing a failure?

Poorly prosecuted monopolistic practices?

Re:Worst. Name. Ever. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31317706)

This may be changing...

Its not a popular point of view here on slashdot, but I had a zune and thought it was far superior to the ipod. It was cheaper, had an FM tuner, and the software was IMHO easier to use than itunes, did all the same video things as an ipod, and was easy to use as an external hd. I never really understood why there was hate for the Zune on /. aside from the typical MS animosity.

But the Zune never achieved the Ipod's popularity, even though my friends that had them loved them. I stopped using mine when I got an iphone 3gs, but my gf still uses hers when working out as it is far lighter.

My point is that MS's marketing couldn't make the Zune a success, and they only had middling success pushing their windows mobile devices even though about 3 years ago, they sucked just as bad as all the other locked down and buggy crap that palm and others were pushing.

One could say that MS either hasn't done a good job with their marketing since the 90's, or that they have never had much success pushing anything other than pure software, aside maybe from video game consoles, and input devices.

Re:Worst. Name. Ever. (1)

stephanruby (542433) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321502)

I never really understood why there was hate for the Zune on /. aside from the typical MS animosity.

Blame it on the fact that Zune's early users were all forced to repurchase their music when the DRM scheme was upgraded for the new models. This wasn't just a blunder. After all, companies make blunders all the time. What makes this issue much bigger than a blunder is that Zune never corrected the issue, even in the face of thousands really pissed off customers!

Plus your comparison of Zune vs. iPod is misleading. If someone doesn't want to pay the hefty premium of an iPod, they'll just compare Zune against Creative, or Zune against many of the other non-iPod branded mp3 players. It's not like Zune was the first on the scene with any of those specific features you speak of.

Re:Worst. Name. Ever. (1)

cheesybagel (670288) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322534)

I bought Creative. I really hate Creative but they have done several things right with their MP3 devices: no DRM standard, you can access it like a regular filesystem, so it works on Linux or any other OS as well. The bundled headphones did not suck, etc.

Re:Worst. Name. Ever. (1)

tokul (682258) | more than 4 years ago | (#31318136)

Let us consider: Microsoft is normally ridiculed for inferior products, yet frequently has dominant market share. So how is Microsoft marketing a failure?

Microsoft got its first dominant market share because there were no low cost usable alternatives. Their contractor lost monopoly on hardware, but microsoft software monopoly remained and they benefited from expanding hardware market. After that company abused in dominant market position to push products into other markets, to fight competitors and to sponsor products that don't produce enough income to cover expenses. MS marketing is a failure, because it is over budget and can't come up with good product name ideas.

Re:Worst. Name. Ever. (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 4 years ago | (#31318384)

Because every time they actually attempt to MARKET, they end up confusing end users and techies alike. Do you not remember their seinfeld ads? Or the windows 7 launch party ads?

MS may be good about getting customers, but that is IN SPITE of their marketing attempts.

Re:Worst. Name. Ever. (-1, Offtopic)

jcsotita (1756902) | more than 4 years ago | (#31318418)

Hello I am portuguese I have 4 sites for music will see thanks.(http://tita090.skyrock.com) (wwwyoutube titacaldas)(youtube.com ti123456ful) merci a tute le monde,gracias Ola a todos, sou musico conpositor tenho sites com musicas tudo idealizado por mim, acedam e deem uma opinião obrigado.(http://palcoprincipal.sapo.pt/tita) (youtube ti123456ful)(wwwyoutube titacaldas) (http://tita090.skyrock.com) (http://singer.eklablog.com) (http://jcsotita.eklablog.com) (http://singermusic.over-blogs.com) (http://www.thebestlonks.com) (http://palcoprincipal.sapo.pt/tita) thanks,merci,graci skype:ze.carlos935

Re:Worst. Name. Ever. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31325630)

Microsoft's dominant market share and profits come almost entirely from their OS and Office divisions. Thus aaaalllll the other products they've launched with marketing blitzes have been marketing failures and/or product failures. That includes WinCE devices, several internet/search related things, multiple generations of mp3 players, investing in NBC, and their game consoles (occasionally makes a small profit for a month here and there, but overall several billion in the hole).

Re:Worst. Name. Ever. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31316612)

MS market quite well. They market just enough. Maximum cost vs benefit.

Re:Worst. Name. Ever. (0, Troll)

Eponymous Coward (6097) | more than 4 years ago | (#31317424)

Ok, I get it: due to their market position, they don't need to do much marketing. Good point. But do you honestly think that the marketing they do is well designed or executed? (with the possible exception of XBox)

I just don't understand how a company with so many smart people in it can decide to release a product named "Windows Phone 7 Series". I'm honestly shocked they didn't try to stick "Live" in there somewhere.

CEO thinks people love Windows (1, Interesting)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316794)

Windows "Phone" shows where MS would be today if they didn't have an illegal monopoly on PC Desktop. They think people love and trust to Windows brand and would use it if they have been given a real chance to choose.

On the other hand, Symbian, iPhone OS (post 2.x) and various Linux based platforms and even ARM (CPU) itself enjoys the popularity which would occur on x86 Desktop if MS/Intel/IBM gang didn't exist. It is like the 80s home computer wars and it is fun to watch how amazing things come from competition.

I guess it is Ballmer who insist on Windows name as you would expect from him. Most of people I know says "Windows desktop is really enough from 9 to 5, don't even think I can stand to it in my personal life when I got chance to choose."

Re:CEO thinks people love Windows (1)

ClosedSource (238333) | more than 4 years ago | (#31318512)

"Windows "Phone" shows where MS would be today if they didn't have an illegal monopoly on PC Desktop."

So you're saying without an illegal monopoly on the PC Desktop, their Desktop GUI would suck as much as their mobile one? I don't get the connection.

MS has to compete and they fail (2, Interesting)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 4 years ago | (#31319922)

Monopoly with low quality of code. On a device which requires high quality and efficient code, they fail since there is Symbian, Maemo Apple etc. there.

On Desktop, inefficient code and security issues can be fixed with high speed cpu and security software. On devices, device needs reboot middle of a phone call or has comical battery life. The king on current smart phones is Apple, there is also RIM (Java, imagine!), Nokia (Symbian was developed for mobile) and Google giant. MS enjoys (!) the fact that they have to compete and they really think people like Windows. They don't. It is some de-facto reality rather than choice.

Re:CEO thinks people love Windows (1)

toadlife (301863) | more than 4 years ago | (#31324782)

They think people love and trust to Windows brand and would use it if they have been given a real chance to choose.

Every non-technical person I know that owns an Iphone or Android based phone had no idea that there were phones that ran Windows until I showed them my Touch Pro 2.

Dreadful UI experie (2, Insightful)

linuxci (3530) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316554)

I can't stand the WP7S UI, it just seems irritating. It's designed so nothing fits on the screen, even the date displayed on the pic in the article is truncated. To access anything you'll need to move horizontal and vertical.

It reminds me back in the days of 14" monitors. I remember that in Linux I could set up X to use a much higher resolution than the monitor supported and then you'd use the mouse to pan around the screen. I hated that then, I hate it now.

Make things fit on the screen where possible, scroll only when necessary.

Microsoft is just trying to look fancy with no thought on usability. You'd get tired of all this very quickly.

Re:Dreadful UI experie (2, Interesting)

wh1pp3t (1286918) | more than 4 years ago | (#31317340)

The difference between the implementation of X and WP7 is the Microsoft version has hard points in which the 'desktop' is viewed, whereas X was free floating. IMO, MS should move horizontally OR vertically (not both) since it would be easy to get lost.
If done properly, I don't see an issue. However, as you stated -- the chances of it being a nuisance are very high if not done properly.

Re:Dreadful UI experie (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321394)

The horizontal/vertical scrolling action is an extension of the media center interface (and supposedly Zune, though I've never seen one) and it's not a bad way to go if they feel they need some eye candy (and that seems to be the only way to lure the masses). The one dimensional version of OS nav was recently a topic here on /. as the "next big thing" in finger-manipulated computer work spaces. The fact that they can't fit February on the screen is pretty stupid, but the overall interface makes sense when seen in the extended (22 minute) show and tell from a couple of weeks ago.

I actually _am_ holding my breath (figuratively) for 7 as I prefer several win-only programs (pocket informant and stand-alone GPS software comes to mind) and tethering is high on my list of phone requirements, too. Att he rate its going, the iPhone will never tether, and I doubt that stand alone GPS will ever be an option on either Android or the iPhone. Since the BB is even harder locked down than the iPhone, that leaves only one real player. I hate the stylus-centric mode of win 6 and lower apps, so I'm hoping that 7 will make the jump to finger usefulness that W6 can never have with all its legacy stylus apps.

Re:Dreadful UI experie (1)

radish (98371) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322566)

What do you mean by "standalone" GPS? There are already a number of 3rd party GPS apps on iPhone (Navigon, TomTom, etc).

As for the UI, I happen to really like it. And for something which I spend a large portion of my day using, yes, "eye candy" is important.

This is how it works (1)

daemonenwind (178848) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323262)

It's clear you don't understand how the UI works.

I own a Zune HD, which works from the same concept. Allow me to explain it to you.

The idea is similar to how a desktop works stretched across multiple monitors.
Yes, the background spans them all. However, any individual application only uses 1 monitor's worth of space.
You go side-to-side to access another slice of screen, which is easily done by tapping your finger once on that side of the screen, where you see the next "monitor's worth" as a mini-screen off to that side, dimmer, and "off in the distance".
So it is simultaneously 3-dimensional and multi-monitor, as though the monitors were arranged on a rotating platform.

It actually works very well. I like it.
I can see how you can come away thinking that it's just part of a big screen, based on the released desktop mock-ups. But you're missing the point completely, and need to sit down with the hardware and try it out.

reset button? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31316556)

I wonder where the reset button will be to restart it when it BSODs or otherwise crashes or locks up.

Re:reset button? (1)

sarhjinian (94086) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316906)

I wonder if they fixed the bug that causes Pocket Outlook to corrupt your mailbox when you reset it?

Re:reset button? (2, Funny)

Errol backfiring (1280012) | more than 4 years ago | (#31317318)

It's a shaking motion. The designers thought that the most used motion should be used to the mostly needed command, and every phone has an acceleration sensor these days. Also, if something is not working, users shake the device automatically. Some of the designers suggested that this should be coupled to the user shouting "HELLO!", but that had some internationally challenging problems.

Re:reset button? (2, Funny)

ILikeRed (141848) | more than 4 years ago | (#31318572)

Now those rumors about Microsoft purchasing the Shake-Weight company [youtube.com] makes perfect sense - the paring on sales at Amazon are going to skyrocket Shake-Weight sales. Running low on energy always reseting your phone from a BSOD? Get Shake-Weight and have the arm strength you need to reset any Microsoft phone....

What exactly constitutes as a "hair thicker"? (1)

Khan (19367) | more than 4 years ago | (#31316800)

In looking at those screenshots, that phone looks a LOT thicker than an iPhone. Even with the case I have on mine, it looks thicker.

Re:What exactly constitutes as a "hair thicker"? (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321234)

Um, it has a hard keyboard with it - it's going to be thicker than a screen-only device.

If you want to be bothered by something, you should complain that the keyboard is out but the screen has not rotated to landscape.

Re:What exactly constitutes as a "hair thicker"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31322418)

I dunno, it looks to me like the iPhone would be as thick as the bottom slice plus half the thinner top slice. Which would qualify as a hair thicker in my book. Not all WP7 phones will have a hard keyboard, so I would expect the touchscreen-only models to be on par with the iPhone.

The iPhone is deceptively thick - the continuously rounded back and edges give it the illusion of being thinner than it is.

Who give a turkey? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31317032)

It's crap. I want functionality not a pretty screen. What I've seen demonstrates that pretty continues to be the priority over there at Microsoft.
They will always be behind. I personally have a Windows Mobile 6.1 phone. I can look at the screen and get a ton of information with touching anything. This new tile approach to make it like the iPhone will fail and drive more people away from Windows powered phones. I'm even considering an iPhone and I don't like them.
I'm tired of my Windows phone needing a daily reboot or crashing when it rings. If Windows mobile was as relaible as the iPhone they wouldn't be trying to catch up.

That's my $2. (adjusted for inflation)

-Rj

Re:Who give a turkey? (1)

dunkelfalke (91624) | more than 4 years ago | (#31320898)

I keep reading about those daily reboots, but I have owned 6 different windows mobile phones since 2002 and I never had such problems.

Re:Who give a turkey? (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322316)

Agreed, I am not a fan of WinMo 6 at all - but it never gave me any real problems (regarding crashing or rebooting). Just ugly and hard to use at times - also, the Palm Treo wasn't exactly an eye-catcher (which I ran for a long time).

Re:Who give a turkey? (1)

kirkb (158552) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323368)

I hope that wasn't the "I never saw it so it doesn't exist" argument. I've owned two winmo phones: An ipaq that needed to be reset weekly, and a pharos that needed to be reset every day or two.

FWIW, the first reboot of my iPhone 3GS was six months after I got it. I think I've rebooted it twice more since then.

FWIW2, before I got the 3GS, I was a professional winmo developer plus a lifelong apple hater. So I had to swallow a bit of pride to pay cash dollars for the iPhone. No regrets, though.

Sorry but... (2, Insightful)

rinoid (451982) | more than 4 years ago | (#31319222)

Linking to Engadget is barely allowed at /.

Linking to Engadget stories with lame ass videos that don't even show the product is punishable by ruler slaps!

Looks familiar (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321192)

Looks a lot like a cheaper version of the G1 physically and the actual OS looks like it borrows ideas from the iPhone and Android. If MS is always going to rely on copying other people then they'll always be one step behind. Oh well, I'm sure they'll tie in with Windows in some way to gain an advantage.

Re:Looks familiar (1)

Vegeta99 (219501) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323582)

But Windows Mobile was out on cellular devices LONG before iPhoneOS or Android ever was...

So Microsoft is copying Apple and Google who are copying Microsoft. I'm not even a programmer and I can make infinite loops!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...