Beta
×

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!

No More Firefox For Windows Mobile

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the no-room-at-the-ecosystem dept.

Firefox 226

angry tapir writes "Mozilla has decided to stop development of a version of its Firefox mobile Web browser for phones running Windows Mobile. The reason is that Microsoft has closed the door to native applications on smartphones running its new Windows Phone 7 Series software. More reasoning can be found in a blog post by Stuart Parmenter, director of Mobile Engineering at Mozilla."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First Post (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592094)

This first post is for the glory of GNAA.

Re:First Post (0, Troll)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592126)

The Greater Nashville Apartment Association thanks you! http://www.nashvilleaptasn.org/ [nashvilleaptasn.org]

But next time please take time to put something relevant to the topic in your post.

Preemptive Strike (4, Interesting)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592160)

Given that Microsoft has a closed app store model for Windows 7 (just like the iPhone) the chances are good Microsoft would not allow Mozilla to run anyway, even if they wanted to make a nice Silverlight based browser...

That was an interesting choice on Microsoft's part, I can't believe they are not trying to grasp a lot of C# developers that have shifted to the iPhone just to move where the marketshare is. Now those guys have no reason to switch back anytime soon.

Re:Preemptive Strike (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592264)

who wants windows mobile after the last 6 fiascos? c64 apps are feeling more responsive...

Re:Preemptive Strike (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592538)

> Given that Microsoft has a closed app store model for Windows 7 (just like the iPhone) the chances are good Microsoft would not allow Mozilla to run anyway, even if they wanted to make a nice Silverlight based browser...

I wonder, will the Apple fanboys defend Microsoft for this?

(I, for one, hate the closed app stores on all platforms. I wouldn't have such a big problem if you could get apps (without jailbreaking) from somewhere other than their store, but I do have a big problem with using any device that restricts what I can run on it.)

Re:Preemptive Strike (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592560)

As an apple fan, I say Meh. Who cares?

Re:Preemptive Strike (0, Troll)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592760)

Can you try that again with more Braveheart e.g.

THEY CAN TAKE OUR LIVES BUT THEY CAN'T TAKE OUR WEB BROWSERS! FREEDOM!

Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

Why not? It's proven to work. (4, Funny)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592988)

I wonder, will the Apple fanboys defend Microsoft for this?

I think they did it because they see it works for Apple, and they are tired of being the industry whipping boy for security flaws in a platform. And honestly, who can blame them? They have formed a safe vantage point from which they will probably not be the worst platform for mobile security going forward.

I got the vibe the 7 app store was going to be closed right after they announced Windows 7 Series Mobile (any misordering of words there is not disrespect, I just have given up remembering the proper order), just because of how they framed it...

I think the closed app store model is a good idea that has helped Apple avoid some problems on the platform. What I think is a much, much less good idea is not offering the native SDK out of the chute - did they learn nothing from Palm of all people? And as I said, I think they have made a terrible mistake in not re-courting C# developers to come back into the fold. I'm sure people will jailbreak the 7 phones just like the iPhones, and we'll see some interesting stuff from that.

As far as looking for people to defend Microsoft I'll do you one better - I will even defend what they are doing with cut and paste (as in not having it). I still think it's possible to do some magic with data flows that might approximate cut & paste for most people and be an interesting alternative, so I am interested to see what they are doing.

Re:Preemptive Strike (1)

aristotle-dude (626586) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593116)

> Given that Microsoft has a closed app store model for Windows 7 (just like the iPhone) the chances are good Microsoft would not allow Mozilla to run anyway, even if they wanted to make a nice Silverlight based browser...

I wonder, will the Apple fanboys defend Microsoft for this?

(I, for one, hate the closed app stores on all platforms. I wouldn't have such a big problem if you could get apps (without jailbreaking) from somewhere other than their store, but I do have a big problem with using any device that restricts what I can run on it.)

Why would anyone but the most rabid MSFT fanboys defend this? Apple offers an API for "native" app and game development. What MSFT is doing is more akin to the PDK released by Palm OS which is also not fully "native".

Re:Preemptive Strike (2, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592584)

Given that Microsoft has a closed app store model for Windows 7 (just like the iPhone) the chances are good Microsoft would not allow Mozilla to run anyway, even if they wanted to make a nice Silverlight based browser...

We don't know the exact rules for store approval process yet, but all information on that so far only mentioned malware and stuff such as "indecency" as reasons for rejection, and nothing even remotely similar to Apple's "no compete" clauses.

That said, it still sucks big time. There are rumors that there will be a "non-publicized" way of uploading apps directly via USB, circumventing Marketplace, but somehow I suspect this is really only about SDK debugging tools - not exactly something you expect a non-developer (even a power user) to be prepared to tinker with.

Re:Preemptive Strike (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593134)

You'd be surprised at how quickly someone will write a somewhat friendly wrapper for the SDK's USB loader, and distribute it somewhere like XDA Developers.

There's a rather significant WinMo modding community, they're not gonna lie down for this one.

Re:Preemptive Strike (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593138)

We don't know the exact rules for store approval process yet, but all information on that so far only mentioned malware and stuff such as "indecency" as reasons for rejection, and nothing even remotely similar to Apple's "no compete" clauses.

That's a good point, although they seem very keen to protect "the experience" so I tend to think they will act similarly to things that would replace core functions... but I think they are also trying to allow apps to sort of extend the core experiences (like things that can present different information feeds in those opening tiles) as a kind of relief valve for that energy.

That said, it still sucks big time. There are rumors that there will be a "non-publicized" way of uploading apps directly via USB, circumventing Marketplace, but somehow I suspect this is really only about SDK debugging tools - not exactly something you expect a non-developer (even a power user) to be prepared to tinker with.

I'm pretty sure it will be jailbroken just like the iPhone was, so technical users can do what they want (as they always do). Then I think you'll see a power user path a lot of people will be able to use. What will be really interesting to see is who clamps on down jailbrake exploits more - I think it will be Microsoft, eager to have this platform be as utterly secure as they can make it.

Re:Preemptive Strike (2, Insightful)

IainCartwright (733397) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592710)

Microsoft will not have a closed app store model for winmo7 (although they will have their own app store). You can get an SDK and emulator right now - for free - and make XNA/Silverlight apps that can be downloaded to a winmo7 phone.

If you want to be an good Apple fan you should try not to spout nonsense - your ignorance makes Steve look bad.

Re:Preemptive Strike (0)

maxume (22995) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592812)

(If you are running Vista or Windows 7 you can...)

How sure are you? Microsoft says otherwise. (3, Informative)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593062)

Microsoft will not have a closed app store model for winmo7 (although they will have their own app store). You can get an SDK and emulator right now - for free - and make XNA/Silverlight apps that can be downloaded to a winmo7 phone.

Oh really? [mobilemag.com]

Like Apple and Google, Microsoft has also thrown their hat into the ring and launched an application store called Windows Phone Marketplace. The marketplace won't be empty at launch because Microsoft has a list of impressive development partners such as EA, Foursquare, Namco and Sling to name just a few. But it will indeed be a closed system, similar to Apple's iTunes App store, being the only vehicle where the end-user can download software to their smartphone.

Am I sure? Pretty sure. [engadget.com]

Though there's no way for end users to purchase and install apps outside of the Marketplace, Microsoft is naturally working on a solution for trialling apps on a limited number of devices; if we had to guess, it'll be something akin to Apple's ad hoc installation mode, but Charlie Kindel has said that it won't be available in the first release of the platform. For now, the only way to do it is to unlock devices one at a time through the developer portal, and Microsoft isn't talking about how many devices you'll be able to unlock on an account right now.

The iPhone is totally open as well if you count the ability to develop whatever you like and deploy it - it just costs a little more, but once you have paid you can put anything on the phone.

If you want to be an good Apple fan you should try not to spout nonsense - your ignorance makes Steve look bad.

The thing that really amuses me about the whole Windows vs. Mac thing, is how often the Mac people end up knowing so much more about both platforms than the people who only really know Windows. And so the trend continues it would seem.

If you have other details illustrating the degree of openness for Windows Mobile Series 7 that you claim, by all means share them with the group.

Re:Preemptive Strike (3, Insightful)

im_thatoneguy (819432) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592868)

Given that Microsoft already has an app store and hasn't made any motion to filter what goes into it... I think it's safe to say anyone will probably be able to release anything they please.

Just because there is a gate doesn't mean there is a gatekeeper.

Windows Mobile 7 Series has app review process too (4, Informative)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593192)

I think it's safe to say anyone will probably be able to release anything they please.

I'm not sure how you missed the news if you have been paying attention to WIndows 7 Phone Series at all but... not so [engadget.com] :

We just got out of a meeting with Microsoft's Todd Biggs, who dropped a little bombshell on us: the only official way to get apps on a Windows Phone 7 Series device will be to download them from the just-detailed Windows Phone Marketplace. That means developers will have to abide by Microsoft's technical and content guidelines in order to make it in, with the very real possibility of rejection - sound familiar? Todd told us Microsoft plans to avoid Apple-style submission headaches by making the process transparent and predictable, with a group of Microsoft execs regularly meeting to examine edge cases and refine the guidelines as needed, but even the best intentions can be led astray by a sexy app or two.

Re:Preemptive Strike (1)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593012)

It will be very interesting to see if MS can get it right this time. WinMob grabbed some marketshare thanks to OEMs' efforts to hide all the suckiness... They were not that successful, and MS now says they can make their suckiness go away at the cost of openness and customization... I'm not convinced.

MS has not been very successfull outside their seminal OS monopoly. I'm not sure how they can leverage that for the mobile market... and it seems they aren't, either.

I'm still looking for something that WinMob 7 does that others don't.

The real reason... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592170)

The real reason is because nobody wants to develop to a platform in its death throes. Blackberries, Droids, and iPhones own the market of the so-called 'smartphones' today.

I can't believe this (2, Funny)

bsharp8256 (1372285) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592186)

How dare they not allow native applications to run on their smartphones? Microsoft should die and burn in hell, etc., etc.

Oh thats a shame... (1)

BatGnat (1568391) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592192)

Good thing I got rid of my Windows mobile for an Andorid phone.

If MS want to drive away developers, let them move to Android...

Re:Oh thats a shame... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592786)

Android has its own issues. For example, the game some Android phone makers play with modders, where every version change unroots phones, or actually bricks (as in permanently trashes w/o change to reflash) devices.

I actually miss Windows Mobile. To use the phone to its fullest capacity (yes, including capacity), I had to do no hacks, no low level patches. Just install the right program and go. Every other vendor, I have to play the game of either continuing to run a backlevel OS, or upgrade to the latest and lose capabilities until they are re-hacked in.

Of course MS locking down stuff in Windows Mobile 7 pisses me off.

My next phone, I just want something that was like my old HTC Wizard -- won't brick if someone has a badly cooked image (just a reflash), keeps root/jailbroken, and is easily hackable without the vendor pushing out patches to kill phones.

Re:Oh thats a shame... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592930)

Android has its own issues. For example, the game some Android phone makers play with modders, where every version change unroots phones, or actually bricks (as in permanently trashes w/o change to reflash) devices.

You can ALWAYS reflash an android phone

Nokia/Symbian Phone? (2, Insightful)

mpapet (761907) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593632)

http://www.symbian.org/ [symbian.org]

It's as open as you can possibly get. I understand coding at the OS level is some C++ weirdness or something. But it's all there. Media freedom, OS freedom, works great, lots of apps.

Re:Oh thats a shame... (1)

symbolset (646467) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593268)

It seems a lot of people had that idea [seattlepi.com] . The quarter ended this January, Microsoft dropped 4% (19.7% to 15.7%). This closely matches the 4.3% (from 2.7% to 7.1%) that Google gained with Android. Three more quarters of this trend before the W7 launch and they'll be entering a green field with nowhere to go but up. If progress is delayed at all (when have we ever seen that from the WiMo team?) they'll have the advantage of a whole world market where nobody remembers how much their mobile products suck. Maybe this is part of their evil plan to reboot their mobile brand.

Meh. (-1, Troll)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592214)

On behalf of myself and my HTC Ozone, fuck you very much, Mozilla.

Re:Meh. (1)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592300)

since you forked out for a phone running a Microsoft OS, you deserve only the best closed source browser money can buy to run on it. Enjoy your closed-source world.

Re:Meh. (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592318)

Considering I got it for free, I'm not too upset about it :-)

Re:Meh. (1)

BronsCon (927697) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592466)

Freedom isn't free.

Re:Meh. (1)

Jenming (37265) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592554)

It costs $1.05

Re:Meh. (1)

Starayo (989319) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592762)

Oh, that's not too bad.

Ok guys, I can cover freedom for... twelve people.

Re:Meh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592972)

But it's only $0.99 in Apple's App Store :)

Re:Meh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31593016)

Yeh, buts thats only apple tm freedom, so

when you actually get the app, all it does is make farting noises.

Re:Meh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592306)

Actually you should have said "fuck you very much, Microsoft, and fuck me very much for buying a windows mobile"

Re:Meh. (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592370)

Not sure why there's so much hate for it...been working fine for me

Re:Meh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592442)

Eh, militant FOSS weenies. What ya gonna do...

YUO FAiL IT (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592282)

halt. Even Emacs and M1chael Smith SLING you can Who seel another progress. In 1992,

Re:YUO FAiL IT (1)

Concerned Onlooker (473481) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592550)

Eliza? Is that you?

Re:YUO FAiL IT (1)

Cryolithic (563545) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592692)

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

Microsoft versus Sun's Java and JavaScript (-1, Troll)

ItaloSuave (645798) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592290)

My Mozilla 3.5 version Browser was glitching up on my Desktop PC earlier today, after I committed to a Microsoft JavaScript Update. As a matter of fact, it was not working at all. Didn't Microsoft recently buy Sun Microsystems, the owner of JAVA? I believe so. They fought a big lawsuit over Microsoft unilaterally rewriting Java coding without Sun's permission or license. Now, that is all over with. Fortunately, everything on my PC works now, with a restart. Who knows what the future will bring, with Microsoft owning Java, and Mozilla running JavaScript threads? Could it be, that Microsoft bought Sun in order to take on the Open Source Mozilla Browser Project? Could be, could be . . . .

Re:Microsoft versus Sun's Java and JavaScript (1, Informative)

plover (150551) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592352)

-5, very completely wrong.

Oracle bought Sun, not Microsoft. I can't even imagine a reason for Microsoft to buy Sun other than to let a raving DEVELOPER throw chairs at Java until it was utterly destroyed.

And Java and JavaScript are completely unrelated. JavaScript is to Java as fish is to phishing. They sound similar but are in no way the same thing.

Mozilla running JavaScript threads? Srsly?

Let me fix that:
-10, truly most completely wrong.

Re:Microsoft versus Sun's Java and JavaScript (2, Funny)

all204 (898409) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592396)

And Java and JavaScript are completely unrelated. JavaScript is to Java as fish is to phishing.

Great analogy!

Re:Microsoft versus Sun's Java and JavaScript (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592506)

How can you say that? There's nothing about cars. Hmph.

Re:Microsoft versus Sun's Java and JavaScript (1)

foniksonik (573572) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592852)

Should have been flipped around:

Java is to JavaScript as Fish is to Phishing

Sounds better and more similarity.

So basically (5, Insightful)

Voyager529 (1363959) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592328)

Microsoft is going to create a need for a WinPhone Dev Team to figure out how to jailbreak Windows Mobile phones?

I mean seriously, it's like they're taking everything that I like about owning a WinMo phone and throwing it away. I *like* having a file browser on my phone. I *like* having native applications. I *like* HTC's SenseUI. I *like* being able to use my phone as USB mass storage. I *like* being able to HardSPL my phone and use a custom ROM from HTCpedia or xda-developers. I *like* being able to tether my phone using a standard data plan. I *like* Opera Mobile. These are all features that WinMo had and the iPhone didn't. Between these and the dropped calls (oh, and iTunes), I ditched my iPhone and couldn't be happier. Now they're taking away even the possibility of all of these features? Sure, I could completely understand hiding the file browser by default. I could understand not allowing HTC to ship SenseUI enabled by default. I could understand wanting to streamline the process and moving away from scouring the internet for CAB files and shifting toward a more standardized development process. But seriously Microsoft, don't try to copy Apple's shortcomings at the expense of the very reasons why I chose a WinMo phone.

Re:So basically (2, Insightful)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592402)

Basically, moving to a closed store model throws away one of the few things that are good about WinMo. Next to a phone running raw Linux (like the Nokia N900 *drool*) it's the most open phone. unfortunately, I find it slow, clunky, mildly unstable, and unusable without a stylus. I've recently switched to running a hacked in Android OS, and it's about as stable as WinMo, but is faster and much nicer to use. The XDA developers are doing great work, and when the last few features are working, I doubt I'll use WinMo again, and may move to the Nokia when I have the option.

I tried a beta of Fennec, and really, it needed a lot of work anyway.

WebOS (1)

thule (9041) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592450)

Check out the new Palm phones. Qt was recently ported to them. Palm has not, in any way, prevented people from hacking the phone.

Re:So basically (5, Insightful)

pushing-robot (1037830) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592436)

Speaking of native apps, it's kind of funny how every new smartphone repeats this:

Apple, 2007: Javascript is good enough!
Apple, 2008: Okay, okay, here's a C SDK.

Google, 2008: Java is good enough!
Google, 2009: Okay, okay, here's a C SDK.

Palm, 2009: Javascript is good enough!
Palm, 2010: Okay, okay, here's a C SDK.

Microsoft, 2010: Silverlight and Flash are good enough!

Re:So basically (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592544)

Nokia, 2005 - 2010: C! C++! Shell Scripts! Python! Perl!

I'm just sad that Maemo wasn't on more phones until the N900 came out.

Re:So basically (1)

FlyingBishop (1293238) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592546)

It's still unclear that Flash is going to be available. Ostensibly the motivation behind sticking with Silverlight is security, so that kind of goes out the window if they add Flash.

Re:So basically (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31593230)

It's still unclear that Flash is going to be available. Ostensibly the motivation behind sticking with Silverlight is security, so that kind of goes out the window if they add Flash.

security? Either (a) you are on a massive amount of drugs, or (b) MS has managed to make a more secure version of Silverlight for the phones than for Vista/Win7/XP. You choose.

Re:So basically (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592672)

Microsoft, 2010: Silverlight and Flash are good enough!

Unfortunately, it's more complicated than that. It was already announced that native SDK will be available - but it will only be provided to OEMs, and only for writing preinstalled applications.

Re:So basically (4, Insightful)

Espectr0 (577637) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592922)

That's because it's intentional, and more like:

Company: javascript/java/flash/silverlight are good enough for now, since we want to sell the devices while we have time to develop a native sdk!

Re:So basically (1)

sixknowspring (1740030) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592974)

That was a pretty funny (insightful) summary; definitely noted. And, I'm guessing that WinMo7 is going to follow suit soon enough.

Re:So basically (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593026)

Microsoft, 2010: Silverlight and Flash are good enough!

XNA, the .NET based SDK for Xbox 360, came out in 2008. So when does the public get the C SDK?

Re:So basically (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31593388)

There has always been a native public SDK for Xbox 360. That's what most games are developed in. You think Call of Duty:MW2 is written in C#? :P

The only difference from the XNA kit is what you need to pay for it and how you get approval to release the game.

It is a *public* SDK though and not private/MS Only.

Re:So basically (1)

uberjack (1311219) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593276)

Unfortunately, Android's support for native C code leaves a lot to be desired, as one cannot write entire applications in C. At the moment, the NDK is all but useless to most developers (myself included) that need it for more than just libraries.

Re:So basically (5, Insightful)

mykro76 (1137341) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592472)

I *like* having native applications.
I *like* HTC's SenseUI.
I *like* being able to use my phone as USB mass storage.
I *like* being able to ... use a custom ROM from HTCpedia or xda-developers.
I *like* being able to tether my phone using a standard data plan.
I *like* Opera Mobile.

Android welcomes you.

Re:So basically (1)

mlts (1038732) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592814)

Provided your phone maker doesn't push out an update that bricks your rooted phone. Find me an Android phone maker where I don't have to keep at a backlevel ROM so I can keep root (for example, the latest level on the Cliq locks out root and the holes to get root.)

Re:So basically (3, Informative)

Verteiron (224042) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592920)

It's my understanding that most rooted Android images also disable auto-updates from the provider. Certainly the rooted Droid images do.

Re:So basically (1)

Christophotron (812632) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593020)

Provided your phone maker doesn't push out an update that bricks your rooted phone.

This interests me a lot. I am a WM user and I have never owned an Android phone (yet) but at this rate it looks like my next phone will have to run Android or Meego. In the Android case, I certainly plan to run a rooted phone with a hacked ROM like Cyanogen. Isn't it possible to block carrier OTA updates? That's a *serious* downside to Android if not.. The whole purpose of a hacked ROM is to have total control over my own hardware. If the carrier can screw it all up on a whim, then I'm not really in control, am I? I certainly had no idea that could ever be possible. On WM, there was never any such thing as an OTA update, and I like it that way..

Re:So basically (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31593398)

even if you root your phone we can do what we want to it :) so stop being delusional that you'll ever be in total control.

Re:So basically (2)

Colonel Korn (1258968) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592840)

I *like* having native applications.

I *like* HTC's SenseUI.

I *like* being able to use my phone as USB mass storage.

I *like* being able to ... use a custom ROM from HTCpedia or xda-developers.

I *like* being able to tether my phone using a standard data plan.

I *like* Opera Mobile.

Android welcomes you.

And me, too. WinMo was a flawed platform with some really good flexibility that resulted in some great features not found in the iPhone. Android started with a more solid platform and duplicated the nice aspects of WinMo. WinMo7 (or whatever it's called) may quite possibly be as solid as Android/iPhone/WebOS at its core, but it's giving up the only advantages Microsoft has built in the mobile space. iPhone is the most mature of the mobile platforms, WinMo7 looks essentially like a wannabe iPhone, WebOS is attached to a rapidly sinking ship, and Android is apparently the best of all worlds. Come July I'm heading to Android.

Re:So basically (1)

eugeni (463019) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592612)

Don't worry, no matter what they do, you still can copy-and-paste on WinMo!

Err.. can you?

Re:So basically (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593176)

Not on WinPho 7, except in very limited circumstances.

They really are copying the iPhone. Except, they didn't get the memo that Apple finally got around to adding copy and paste to the iPhone.

Re:So basically (2, Interesting)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592660)

I mean seriously, it's like they're taking everything that I like about owning a WinMo phone and throwing it away. I *like* having a file browser on my phone. I *like* having native applications. I *like* HTC's SenseUI. I *like* being able to use my phone as USB mass storage. I *like* being able to HardSPL my phone and use a custom ROM from HTCpedia or xda-developers. I *like* being able to tether my phone using a standard data plan. I *like* Opera Mobile. These are all features that WinMo had and the iPhone didn't.

I wholeheartedly agree. I was actually waiting for WinPhone 7 MIX announcement to decide which smartphone will be my next. That decision was made next day after the announcement, and the phone is Nexus One...

It seems that Android now is everything that WinMo used to be - open in terms of what you can install on it, both native and managed applications allowed, great RAD development tools, decent documentation.

Sadly, I can understand why WinPhone was made that way - no-one can deny Apple's access with iPhone, and that makes it abundantly clear that most casual users don't care about openness of platform for developers - or even understand the concept - even if it still does affect them indirectly. So copying iPhone's model is the obvious choice so long as $$$ are involved.

Still... what happened to "developers, developers, developers"?

Re:So basically (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592900)

Well, then go with one of Nokia’s Linux phones. They seem to walk in the opposite direction and make the systems freer and freer. (They own QT, which gives you a feeling for their dedication.)

Re:So basically (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31593566)

Who would bother to jailbreak a WinPhone? Really?

Just one more in an ever expanding list of reasons to ditch Windows for Linux, now on the Nokia N900!

Microsoft is at it again (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592348)

They're just copying the iPhone restrictions from Apple!

But they can't even copy that right.... (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592448)

They're just copying the iPhone restrictions from Apple!

If that were true Mozilla would not have dropped the platform, because the iPhone allows native development (it's just a question of which built-in libraries you can use).

Re:Microsoft is at it again (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592500)

They're just copying the iPhone restrictions from Apple!

Yes, but it doesn't work the same. Apple can get away with it because of the Cult Factor. Widows Mobil and the phones it runs on doesn't have that. My boss, a diehard Windows network admin LOVES his Android phone.

Re:Microsoft is at it again (4, Funny)

Concerned Onlooker (473481) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592624)

"Widows Mobil"

A gas station only for women who have lost their husbands?

Re:Microsoft is at it again (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592634)

So that millions that bought their first Apple product with the iPhone are immediately cult members? The only folks that sound like a cult are also always the first to start slinging the word 'cult' and 'fanboi'. Without fail, they are Windows users.

If your boss "LOVES" his phone, that's more disturbing that a typical cult member to my mind.

Re:Microsoft is at it again (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593326)

You are clearly a member of the Cult of Jobs, Mr. Anon.

Shame on me, RTFA. (4, Interesting)

headkase (533448) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592360)

So the reason Microsoft is not allowing native applications is because they are requiring apps to run in either Silverlight or XNA. This is a classic strike against for-profit closed-source: their priorities do not always line up with their users. Remove the profit-motive and all of a sudden you are following your users not trying to make your own tech the standard of the day. I like my software bottom-up please, not top-down.

Re:Shame on me, RTFA. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592622)

Remove the profit-motive and all of a sudden you are following your users not trying to make your own tech the standard of the day. I like my software bottom-up please, not top-down.

Remove the "for profit" motive?!? That's like asking geeks to remove the "for sex" motive.

Re:Shame on me, RTFA. (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592702)

So the reason Microsoft is not allowing native applications is because they are requiring apps to run in either Silverlight or XNA.

There's more to it. XNA applications are normally not sandboxed - they can do "unsafe" operations (pointer arithmetic etc) which circumvent GC and various runtime checks, but also work faster. They can also do P/Invoke calls to DLLs written in C. But, heck, even given just C#, but with a full set of its "unsafe" features, it would be possible to write a C-to-C# compiler, and performance would be pretty good at runtime too (maybe about 10-15% slower than gcc).

Silverlight, theoretically, doesn't preclude all that stuff, either. It's normally sandboxed when running in the browser, for obvious reasons, but it doesn't have to be sandboxed everywhere.

The problem is with the platform itself - it sandboxes all managed applications it runs, both XNA and Silverlight...

Re:Shame on me, RTFA. (1)

W3bbo (727049) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593070)

XNA is sandboxed on the Xbox 360 (in fact, XNA on the Xbox 360 runs on top of a variant of the Compact Framework and not the full desktop/server Framework distribution).

C-to-CIL compilers already exist, Microsoft includes one as part of VC.

Anyway, Silverlight actually disables unsafe code, so C# is gimped in this regard on Windows Phone 7 ( http://forums.silverlight.net/forums/p/2983/182246.aspx [silverlight.net] ).

Re:Shame on me, RTFA. (1)

im_thatoneguy (819432) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593256)

Their priorities perfectly line up with their users. By forcing everything to run in managed space they can more easily develop a stable predictable environment. Once you open up core functionality then you get blue-screens of death and their ilk.

I'm sure we'll eventually get a full SDK. But the majority of apps can run fine as a managed application--the exception being something like a web browser.

Meh (2, Funny)

PPH (736903) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592374)

So there will only be 11 selections on the browser choice menu.

I can still pick Opera.

Re:Meh (1)

Savage-Rabbit (308260) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592860)

So there will only be 11 selections on the browser choice menu.

I can still pick Opera.

And those are all written in C# and are therefore ready to deploy on Windows Phone 7 Series devices at a moment's notice are they?

Methinks Firefox is only the first casualty of this decision. Portability is a pretty important thing in Mobile App development. Fennec, for example, is being developed for several Mobile OS platforms simultaneously. Moving to C# forces a lot of software companies to re implement a C# version of their apps from scratch if they want to market them on Windows Mobile devices.

Re:Meh (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593146)

And those are all written in C# and are therefore ready to deploy on Windows Phone 7 Series devices at a moment's notice are they?

The implementation language is not the installed object. C# stuff runs on .NET if I understand all the Microsoft promotional stuff. You can code in C, C++, Java, VB, Perl, or Fortran and build a .NET app. Or so Microsoft pleads when they try to get us to port our apps to that framework. And the port should be dead simple. According to Microsoft.

Please tell me if this is not in fact the case, as we would like to tell MS "bullsh*t" the next time they come by with their sales pitch.

Re:Meh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31593580)

Well, I took the nethack source code, loaded it into Visual C++, selected /CLR and compiled targeting the MSIL / CLR 'processor'.

Worked fine.

(I suspect it produced a MSIL assembly that made a lot of P/Invoke calls to x86 dlls, but it did work first short.)

Re:Meh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31593144)

Not only are there a ton of other browser options, but they're virtually all better than Fennec. After nearly a year and 4 alphas, the software just plain doesn't work... performance is crippled and really basic stuff (navigation) is more or less impossible. Mozilla's idea of shunting the navigation icons off of the screen so that you have to pan to the right-most portion of the page was a bit of foolishness that I'll never understand.

In short, you won't be missed.

Eh (1)

jav1231 (539129) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592480)

It's an Android/iPhone world now. WinMo and Palm are marginalized.

Re:Eh (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592568)

Especially since Palm is rumoured to be moving to Android [engadget.com] .

Re:Eh (1)

rwven (663186) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593456)

Palm is a software shop... Why would they give up the one (semi) valuable thing they have? There'd be no reason left to even consider them.

ROFL! (4, Interesting)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592600)

Good grief, just how stupid can these guys get!

Just about the ONLY nice thing people say about Windows on a phone is that it is an open platform for all the corporate junk. Now it is a closed clone of the iPhone complete with app store. All the evil with none of the hipster kewl artsy metrosexual buzz.

Without a monopoly Microsoft couldn't sell icewater in hell.

Re:ROFL! (1)

Sheen (1180801) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593434)

kinda like how linux cant get a proper marketshare, even tho its given away freely eh?

Windows 7 Immobile (1, Interesting)

syousef (465911) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592638)

Bone heads. Apple's partially closed approach has been a PR disaster. Despite having a slick phone, there are plenty who'll avoid it like the plague. Only the fact that it was first to market has saved it So MS, who's anything but first to market with advanced smartphones, decides to go one better and close development to everything except CNA and Silverlight? (while Ironically Apple won't support Flash). It's like watching Dumb and Dumber.

Re:Windows 7 Immobile (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592720)

I was thinking it was more like "Dirty Rotten Scoundrels".

Re:Windows 7 Immobile (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31593254)

It has been a PR issue, but it has not affected sales in the slightest. People still are buying from Apple's app store in droves, and the app developers toe the Apple line. Why? Because people still buy from the platform in droves, and to be honest, the people who want to tether, jailbreak their phones, or be able to install custom stuff they have are in a very small minority to the masses who take what they are given.

The sad thing is that *all* phone platforms now are becoming closed. Windows Mobile 7 slams the doors when previous versions allowed anyone to distribute apps as they so chose. Android makers will push updates that brick rooted phones. Apple wages an arms race with jailbreakers.

Windows CE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31592744)

I'm not sure why everyone's going ape shit here. I've actually looked at the API. Yes it's massively changed, it's very xaml and .net oriented and they are obviously trying to throw the Win32/CE stuff out the door, but it's still very powerful from what I had time to test in a week, many options and I do not see them locking applications out.

Other than that the interface and rule changes we can only have Apple thank to thank for. Let's just hope the one button mouse doesn't catches on next.

Re:Windows CE (1)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592878)

The problem is all the old Windows Mobile applications won't work - it might as well be a new OS. It's madness really - WinMo was never the most elegant of OSs but it had loads of software. If I'm going to move to a new OS it's much more likely to be Android than Windows Phone 7.

Re:Windows CE (NOT - WM7 is client of CE, not CE) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31593362)

WM7 (6.x, 5.x, 4.x, 3.x, 2.x) are based on CE, the underlying OS. Windows CE is still "native code", with a Win32 API, if you want to classify it that way. WM* is a shell, if you want to put it some way. The current WM, 6.5.3, is based on CE 5, which has been generally available for five years. It also has a 32 MB process address space; 32 processes max. No, really. CE 6 does away with that. No current Wm* uses CE 6.

RIP Windows Mobile (1)

foxylad (950520) | more than 4 years ago | (#31592862)

Windows Mobile is just another ball that Microsoft dropped, and Windows Mobile 7 isn't going to bounce that ball high enough to catch again. It'll soon be used only by employees of corporates who are trapped in the Microsoft ecosystem, who'll all have their own Apple/Android phone in the other pocket.

Microsoft have had years to catch up to Apple, and failed miserably. Android is evolving faster than either - I have a Nexus One and in my opinion it demonstrates Android has already overtaken Apple. I predict Microsoft will buy RIM to try and bolster their market share, but that it'll soon be a two-horse race between Apple and Android.

So smart move, Mozilla - no point flogging that dead horse.

Win 7 will probably kill Windows on mobile (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31593058)

Without getting into a lot of detail, TFA is correct. For those of us that bet on WinMo as the 'real developer's platform' alternative (a.k.a. native SDK) now that Palm's gone, the Win Phone 7 announcement is a colossal fail. Win Phone 7 manages to copy all the worst of the iPhone, and band-aids it with an awesome DirectX port. But it's a broken platform, just like the iPhone.

The Win 7 announcement was like flipping a switch for us. We went from "betting the farm" to "well, they're dead now" basically overnight. Win Phone 7 will probably be the best gaming phone ever built. Awesome, if you make games...

It's really a classic MS moment. They brought some amazing new stuff to the table. And then completely f^%ked it up. Deliberately throwing away compatibility because some designer told programmers how computers should work. Sigh. Welcome to the new church. How long did the Inquisition run before people figured it out?

This is both New and Surprising! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31593216)

So a development team locks itself into a Microsoft platform and SDK, then gets screwed over.

WiMo, Microsoft's second OS/2 (2, Interesting)

koko (66015) | more than 4 years ago | (#31593294)

Wait -- then MS's OS/3?

And it's not that bad, really, it's not. It's not popular in the west; I could count the WiMos I've come across the past few years. Head East and it's still popular.

Skype? Gone. FF? Gone. Is Opera next?

Meh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31593402)

I waited years for this. I used it back when it was an alpha and called Minimo. It has always supposedly been coming soon. I doubt they ever would have finished it anyway. This is a convenient escape for Mozilla.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?