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!

Windows Phone 7 Hits Technical Preview Milestone

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the touch-me-there dept.

Cellphones 195

suraj.sun writes "Microsoft's upcoming Windows Phone 7 mobile operating system has today reached its biggest milestone yet, with a technical preview announced placing the OS on the 'home stretch' to launch. 'We are certainly not done yet — but the craftsmen (and women) of our team have signed off that our software is now ready for the hands-on everyday use of a broad set of consumers around the world — and we're looking forward to their feedback in the coming weeks, so that we can finish the best Windows Phone release ever together,' Terry Myerson, Microsoft's Corporate Vice President of Windows Phone Engineering, wrote tonight." There's coverage around the net including CNet, NeoWin and Engadget.

cancel ×

195 comments

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

Ah, let's just call it done (0, Troll)

Saint Stephen (19450) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950642)

It's based on creaky old CE, it supports no features, and it has a silverlight-y shell with a couple of new spins on the same old workflow. Let's ship it!

Facebook will write an app for it and somebody will probably buy it.

Maybe this time it will sync with 64-bit Office. The current ActiveSync says "aw, just install 32-bit Office, you don't need 64-bit anyway!" (ITunes has no problems synching with 64-bit office, btw.)

Re:Ah, let's just call it done (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950674)

You can Synch with Office?

I thought it was just Outlook.

What happens when I synch excel on my phone?

Re:Ah, let's just call it done (3, Interesting)

Saint Stephen (19450) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950740)

No, it's just Outlook. (Files can synch.) You get a wierd error with 64-bit activesync with 64-bit office; it doesn't work!

Re:Ah, let's just call it done (4, Insightful)

SquarePixel (1851068) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950800)

Microsoft will be enforcing content restrictions on Windows Phone 7 applications, by preventing users from sideloading applications as they previously had done with Windows Mobile. This results in all applications having to pass through the Windows Phone Marketplace where content restrictions apply.[34][35] Users are free to sync whatever content they want to their phone or view any website from the web browser.

Microsoft said that applications containing pornography will be prevented from being installed on Windows Phone 7, as well as applications containing images that fit the definition of "sexually suggestive". Violence and all nudity will be censored from apps. Suggestions or depictions of prostitution, sexual fetishes, or basically anything that "a reasonable person would consider to be adult or borderline adult content" will be forbidden from Windows Phone 7 apps.

Microsoft elaborated that it would disallow apps containing "images that reveal nipples, genitals, buttocks, or pubic hair".

When will the US understand that sex is not bad, evil or something that should be banned from adults? Of course, the games with violence and killing will be allowed, but no, not such unharmful and natural thing like nudity or sex.

Sex Everywhere Already (2, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950912)

When will the US understand that sex is not bad, evil or something that should be banned from adults?

When will Slashdot users understand that not everyone should be required to sell sex if they do not wish to?

Anyone can get porn onto mobile devices via web applications. If you look around you'll find that the porn industry seems to have figured out how to sell sex over web interfaces quite well to date.

It's not a ban, it's just a choice not to sell it through a corporate channel with a brand to maintain.

Re:Sex Everywhere Already (1, Insightful)

SquarePixel (1851068) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951046)

it's just a choice not to sell it through a corporate channel with a brand to maintain.

And that is the exact problem. US people, especially religious ones think there's some problem with nudity. This usually tends to be the older ones, most in their 20's don't have this problem. What exactly is it that makes nudity so bad?

Re:Sex Everywhere Already (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32951082)

Have you looked at yourself in a mirror lately?

Re:Sex Everywhere Already (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951118)

This usually tends to be the older ones, most in their 20's don't have this problem.
So what started off with someone out of the blue trying to pinpoint Americans not liking sex, all the way to people over 20's being the older ones who don't like sex.

I'd first start by saying don't generalize, and realize that what you may have seen is a small minority of the world. Sex and sexually explicit content is sold daily in America, in and out of the mainstream within America.

That being said, who wants a cock flapping around in a picture that your child will be watching on tv?

Re:Sex Everywhere Already (1)

xouumalperxe (815707) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951696)

That being said, who wants a cock flapping around in a picture that your child will be watching on tv?

That's the point though, isn't it? When you say it like that, you're implying there's an intrinsic problem with kids and nudity on TV. I wouldn't have much of an issue with kids watching Life of Brian, though -- it's all about the portrayal.

What an dumb statement (1, Troll)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951126)

And that is the exact problem. US people, especially religious ones think there's some problem with nudity.

Religious people have a higher birthrate than anyone so I'd rethink the idea they have a problem with nudity alone.

There is also a huge difference between nudity and sex. You can for example find classic works on art in various iPhone applications.

Obviously Microsoft and Apple are not religious companies so religion doesn't enter into to. It's just that they do not care to be associated with sexual products, and why should they not be free to do so if they find it too base or whatever other reason comes to them?

Re:What an dumb statement (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951334)

"Religious people have a higher birthrate than anyone so I'd rethink the idea they have a problem with nudity alone."

You can't get pregnant alone - nude or otherwise (unless you go shopping on the net for a sperm donor and a turkey-baster).

Must be that faith-based schooling - the same stuff that taught people that they could catch STDs off a toilet seat back when it was called VD. Or that douching with coke would prevent pregnancy. And so would coitus interruptus.

Re:What an dumb statement (1)

darkpixel2k (623900) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951966)

You can't get pregnant alone - nude or otherwise (unless you go shopping on the net for a sperm donor and a turkey-baster).

Either that, or you accidentally trip and fall into into the average slashdotter's sock hamper...

Re:What an dumb statement (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952378)

You can't get pregnant alone - nude or otherwise (unless you go shopping on the net for a sperm donor and a turkey-baster).

Either that, or you accidentally trip and fall into into the average slashdotter's sock hamper...

... Eww !- a whole hamper - sounds like a sticky situation.

But if slashdotters are like other guys, there's no risk - they never put their dirty clothes in the hamper, they just call malloc(sizeof(socks)) and store them on the heap. And then they'll just sit there until either:

  1. someone else (usually a woman) free()s them properly;
  2. another process (family_dog.bin) corrupts the free store;
  3. a call to new(TCleanSocks) returns null, so they walk the heap of cashed dirty socks looking for the least objectionable object to reuse.

Re:Sex Everywhere Already (-1, Flamebait)

aristotle-dude (626586) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951296)

it's just a choice not to sell it through a corporate channel with a brand to maintain.

And that is the exact problem. US people, especially religious ones think there's some problem with nudity. This usually tends to be the older ones, most in their 20's don't have this problem. What exactly is it that makes nudity so bad?

You could not be more wrong. Religious people don't have a problem with nudity. Religious people get naked with their spouse and "get it on". A lot of religious people would not have a problem with "art" photography with nudes in it. Pornography is not created as "art". Its sole purpose is for people to look at it and then self-abuse themselves into a climax. That is not sex. Sex requires two people.

Re:Sex Everywhere Already (4, Insightful)

Mongoose Disciple (722373) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951346)

Pornography is not created as "art". Its sole purpose is for people to look at it and then self-abuse themselves into a climax. That is not sex. Sex requires two people.

Because multiple people never watch pornography together, right?

It's fine that you prefer to have a puritanical worldview, but let's not pretend it's held by everyone or in some way rationally based.

Re:Sex Everywhere Already (2, Insightful)

SquarePixel (1851068) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951412)

Its sole purpose is for people to look at it and then self-abuse themselves into a climax.

Self-abuse? Why be so serious about having a little bit of fun with yourself? You only life once and you might just as well enjoy some beautiful ladies (or men, if you're a woman) and do what obviously is fun and feels good.

You know, women do it too. What about phone sex? That's two people, but you just do it to pleasure yourself and not to have babies. Would you call that self-abuse too?

Re:Sex Everywhere Already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32951976)

self-abuse

There is the problem.

Re:Sex Everywhere Already (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32951998)

Its sole purpose is for people to look at it and then self-abuse themselves into a climax.

Abuse? I think you're doing it wrong.

Re:Sex Everywhere Already (1)

misexistentialist (1537887) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952284)

Sadly few religions actual promote nudity and sex. Hinduism was on the right track, but they also seem to have taken the wrong track. What we are left with is "modesty" and "abstinence"--and pornography--that are indeed rather pathological.

Re:Sex Everywhere Already (4, Insightful)

ubermiester (883599) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952376)

What exactly is it that makes nudity so bad?

It's not that nudity is so bad, it's what happens when kids are exposed to porn that people are concerned with. Kids have raging hormones that operate whether they are prepared for the consequences or not. And by consequences i dont mean teen pregnancy (kids who are getting some at that age are probably not downloading porn apps on their phones). The problem is that porn presents sexuality in its most mechanical form. No love, no personal relationship, just rubbing. Women are presented as easy and submissive. They do what they are told, and don't seem to need anything more than a man in the room to be ready and willing to do whatever the man wants. Young men are obviously not going to assume that all women are as slutty as the "characters" in a porn vid, but they cannot hope to understand how women actually feel about and have sex by watching porn. Parents and schools are the last places kids turn to when it comes to sex, and by the time they actually see a real nude person in their bedroom, they've probably seen thousands of digital ones there for years.

And that's just the boys. Consider how a porno makes most girls feel. They see women doing things that the average adult would stutter to explain. Almost all of the women they see are submissive and objectified (that may be something some women are into, but they don't show the woman negotiating her contract or explaining what she will or wont do). So-called "soft" porn or skinimax flix are a little more sensitive to the female psyche, but they are less and less common. (Check out how many of these series are on vs how many websites there are dedicated to the more damaging "slutty" porn).

I am not against images of nudity or even porn for adults (watch it myself from time to time...). But to ask with incredulity why people are so concerned with nudity is to ignore the fact that kids are NOT adults. They are not prepared to deal with the condensed and distorted view of sexuality that porn presents.

Nudity is not the issue. It's the developing psyche of children that people are concerned with.

PS: For the record, i am not religious at all so i am not coming at this from a moralistic point-of-view. I simply have a young daughter who's well-being is my top priority in life, so i think about this stuff a lot.

Re:Sex Everywhere Already (1)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951582)

Correct. Except, of course, when normal channels for distributing content (i.e. Flash) also are banned.

Re:Sex Everywhere Already (2, Informative)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951828)

It's not a ban, it's just a choice not to sell it through a corporate channel with a brand to maintain.

Quote the GP:

Microsoft said that applications containing pornography will be prevented from being installed on Windows Phone 7, as well as applications containing images that fit the definition of "sexually suggestive". Violence and all nudity will be censored from apps. Suggestions or depictions of prostitution, sexual fetishes, or basically anything that "a reasonable person would consider to be adult or borderline adult content" will be forbidden from Windows Phone 7 apps.

Yes, it's Microsoft's choice to shoot themselves in the foot if they wish. I, for one, will NOT buy a phone that limits MY choices. If I want porn on my phone, I'll put porn on my phone, and nobody that sells a phone with built in censorship will sell one to me; they're shit out of luck.

Re:Ah, let's just call it done (1)

Mongoose Disciple (722373) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950966)

When will the US understand that sex is not bad, evil or something that should be banned from adults?

I figure it'll be about a fortyear after we adopt the metric system.

Of course, since using kilometers is proven to turn you socialist, who knows when that will be?

Re:Ah, let's just call it done (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32950970)

When will SquarePixel learn how the reply option works as to not be off topic with the existing thread?

Re:Ah, let's just call it done (4, Interesting)

dmgxmichael (1219692) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950932)

Microsoft ascended to supremacy because the PC was in a niche where IBM was irrelevant, and further was more important to a larger segment of the population than the segment that cared about IBM's dominance -- large computers and servers. IBM was never displaced from their market and Microsoft will never be displaced from the desktop. And now history is repeating itself. The iPhone and Android are in a niche where Microsoft, like IBM before it, is irrelevant. And honestly I haven't seen an effort to get into a market this feeble since since Atari released the Jaguar.

This is ultimately a good thing. Microsoft can only seem to do interoperability when they don't have a monopoly. Portable devices will destroy IE's ability to ever set the tone for the web again. Considering the damage they have done to the progress of the web their fall is something to celebrate.

And yes, scads of IE dependent corp machines will remain for years to come. The web will move on. Truth be known the inability of IE 6 to deal with highly interactive sites will be seen as a benefit by CEO's since employees won't be "playing" on the clock. That's fine though - the rest of us can move on.

Re:Ah, let's just call it done (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32951624)

dream on - ie will be around on most machines for years to come, and for the simple reason that people like it.

the point here is that html is for text and pics - please leave the animation and video to flash. that's the way it is and that's the way it will stay.

keep your css and html5 crap to yourself thankyou very much. no one needs or wants it that stuff except cocksuckers like you.

Re:Ah, let's just call it done (1)

dmgxmichael (1219692) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952180)

dream on - ie will be around on most machines for years to come, and for the simple reason that people like it.

the point here is that html is for text and pics - please leave the animation and video to flash. that's the way it is and that's the way it will stay.

keep your css and html5 crap to yourself thankyou very much. no one needs or wants it that stuff except cocksuckers like you.

How intelligent of you AC. Grouse all you want, but HTML 5 and CSS 3 are here to stay - IE 9 will be supporting them I for one am happy to see Microsoft finally starting to push back and innovate again. IE 9's use of the GPU especially for canvas rendering is impressive. But let's not kid ourselves - there would be no development on IE if Microsoft wasn't losing market share to competitors at an alarming rate.

IE 6 is not a bad browser in and of itself. But it overstayed its welcome. Microsoft won the browser war and then chose not to continue development. If IE 7 had followed in '02 or '03 then IE as a brand wouldn't be so tarnished. Instead Microsoft sat on their hands. The most comical part though is Microsoft let IE 6 and it's attendant corporate intranets get so much inertia that the browser has now cost them tens of millions of dollars in lost contracts as corporations actively resist upgrades to OS'es that don't support IE 6. I doubt they'll make this mistake again.

You can be immature and call people names like a kid out of junior high school all you want, but technology continues to push onward. Microsoft can join in this or be left behind. You have the same choice.

MS still has a chance.... (1)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952322)

A few ways that Windows Phone 7 can carve out it's own niche in the new dog-eats-dog mobile space:

1) Concentrate more on Corporate features.. full Exchange and Office support, Sharepoint, etc. than iPhone/Android

2) Leverage XBox integration and XNA Developer base, Microsoft demo-ed developing games for XBox, Windows PCs and Windows Phone 7 from pretty much the same codebase(except of course, controller and graphic resolution and capability differences). See http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/09/microsoft-shows-off-xna-games-running-on-windows-phone-full-3d/ [engadget.com]

This might result in the big Xbox/Windows developer base "easily" porting from Xbox, or simultaneously developing Xbox, Windows and Phone 7 games... a big plus compared to the Objective C and Java hurdles that iPhones and Android development creates.

And integrate with Xbox/Kinect somehow... use it as an additional controller or to navigate menus on Xbox?

3)Tighter Windows 7 Integration.. hopefully develop cool features such as controlling the phone from the PC, using it as an additional alert display etc etc.

4) Leverage the huge .NET/C#/VB.NET developer/Third parties base to develop applications.

An uphill battle for sure... but I won't count MS out yet. After all, they have inscribed "Developers, Developers, DEVELOPERS!" on the side of the free phone prototypes that they're handing out to developers.

Re:Ah, let's just call it done (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32951078)

Pure BS all you write. It not based on CE at all.

Your installation "abilities" tells it all about what kind of moron you are.

Re:Ah, let's just call it done (1)

Kepesk (1093871) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951480)

Heheh. I can't wait to see this one become a flop too. Microsoft really needs to work on their ability to put out useful stuff.

Re:Ah, let's just call it done (4, Funny)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952090)

I hated Windows Mobile more than I've hated any version of Windows OSs.

Words cannot describe what an absolute pile of garbage that was.

I would rather have tent stakes driven through my eyeballs than spend money on a Windows OS for mobile.

I would rather sit on a cactus doused in sulfuric acid than use Windows Mobile.

I would rather watch The Phantom Menace on repeat for a month while covered in bees and spiders.

I would rather have been given a writing credit for Battlefield Earth.

I would rather be in a relationship with Mel Gibson than use Windows Mobile.

Worst of all, I think I'd rather sign a lifetime contract to use a Kin.

Milestone for a Millstone (1)

crovira (10242) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952122)

Window xxx #'s biggest problems are:
1) that its from Microsoft, (they're on your desktop at work, 'nuf said,)
2) that its based on Windows, (its on your desktop at work, 'nuf said,)
3) that its NOT something you actually bought for yourself,
    (and never has been, [if it wasn't built into the box when it arrived, you wouldn't have it in the house,])
4) that its from Microsoft, (who insist on shooting themselves in the foot by reminding you that its Windows xxx #.)

Microsoft's problems will remain for as long as:
1) the accountants in HR where you work have total control of what you can do,
2) the accountants at Microsoft have total control over what Microsoft can do,
3) all accountants are risk averse bunches of unimaginative, joy-killing non-entities.

I predict utter failure for Microsoft with complete certainty because of their past success, and how they achieved it.

They became dominant on the desktop by buggering and then beggaring all of their 'partners" until the margins were so thin that there are fewer PC chassis manufacturer left ACROSS THE ENTIRE PLANET than the average person has fingers and toes.

Microsoft so commoditized the PC industry that only the extremely risk averse are left.

Innovation costs money and is risky.

Nobody has any money left to risk.

Microsoft has effectively written its own epitaph: "A Computer On Every Desktop." To which a wag might add: "And that's IT!"

Who cares. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32950652)

Some OS that no phones care about hits a milestone that no-one was waiting for.

Yaawwwnnn. (1, Insightful)

1shooter (185361) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950660)

Wake me when it's finished. Then I'll take a look and see how it stacks up against the competition.

Nice (2, Informative)

TrisexualPuppy (976893) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950666)

I foresee that this will be like Vista, Win7, or Zune. It's all hyped up by Microsoft's marketing department where advertising money is no object, and a few people buy it, and whammo! Kludgy, weird user interface that is harder to use than what they had out ten years ago (e.g. Win CE).

Re:Nice (1)

DWMorse (1816016) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950718)

I disagree that Win 7 is ALL hype, though it was fun to attend the conference for a half-hour, get free donuts, and a copy of Win 7 Ultimate, and a shirt. There's substance to it, regardless of whether or not it's on par with [insert favorite distro here.]

Last I heard, Phone 7 didn't even have copy-paste. Is that still true?

Re:Nice (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32952030)

Statement from Redmond..

"Windows Phone 7 Series will not initially offer copy and paste; instead, we try to solve the most common uses for copy and paste via single-tap action. For example, people often want to take an address and view it on a map, highlight a term in the browser and do a search or copy a phone number to make a call. Instead of the user manually doing a copy and paste in these scenarios, we recognize those situations automatically and make them happen with just one touch. In our early testing people have been pleased with this approach, but we're always listening to feedback and will continue to improve our feature set over time based on what we hear."

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/19/microsoft-windows-phone-7-series-will-not-initially-offer-copy/ [engadget.com]

Re:Nice (5, Insightful)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950792)

To be fair, the Zune could've been a success had MS not screwed it up. The hardware was actually quite good and the few people I know that owned them really liked them.

Re:Nice (1, Interesting)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951236)

The Zune could have been a success if MS hadn't decided to basically be late to the iPod revolution. I don't think there is a single person who looks at the Zune and doesn't see it just as an MS branded iPod in poo colors. Yes, the Zune's hardware was nice, but the average person sees it as a crappy rip-off of an Apple product, not to mention MS has tried to do things similar to the Zune with "Plays For Sure" except for the fact that the Zune can't even play that content.

The Zune was dead on arrival, had it come before the iPod and done everything it would have been a modest success, but how can you look at the Zune and -not- see that this is just an MS branded iPod?

Re:Nice (2, Informative)

GF678 (1453005) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951564)

Well it would have been nice if Microsoft bothered to sell the Zune overseas, such as here in Australia. But they didn't. Why they didn't is an exercise left up to those who give a shit. Not my problem if Microsoft didn't think seriously enough about their product to warrant worldwide competition with the iPod.

Re:Nice (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32951650)

I tried using an ipod classic for a few weeks before returning it and getting the zune 80gb player. I've been nothing but satisfied with the device since day one. The Zune software is way better than itunes (how did microsoft manage to make software LESS bloated than a competitor???), the ZunePass is great, the hardware has given me 0 problems and well over 2 years later still gets excellent battery life. You can now buy 10 *MP3s* a month on the pass, making it $15 for 10 drm-free songs and unlimited downloading of drm'd crap, both of which I use heavily on the service. The zunepass can be used on three computers and three devices at once meaning you and two friends can share the pass for $5 each (cue the 'GL finding 2 friends with zunes... I have quite a few using them actually...) Only once did I have a problem playing DRM'd material and it's because I didn't sync the device with the software for over 30 days. For all the knocks the Zune has been getting, it'd be nice to see all the nay-sayers actually try the device out before giving it a hard time. Marketing fail? Definitely. Product fail? Quite the contrary. Every person I know who has an ipod that has tried out a zune has switched over to it from apple and hasn't looked back. The new HD devices are also excellent. I picked one up from fry's and played with it for a few days but returned it because although it is superior to the existing 80gb/120gb players, i couldn't justify the cost of a new device when my 80gb still did exactly what I needed it to: play music. As for video, I'd never watch video on a handheld player anyway, so I could care less about 'plays for sure' having problems with video. FLAC? I convert it for my player anyway.... it just takes up too much space on the device.

Re:Nice (1)

dmgxmichael (1219692) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952296)

Inertia is a powerful thing though. A system must be a LOT better to displace an established competitor. Linux fans should know this well, their OS is technically superior to Windows in pretty much every way, but Windows has the established customer base. Once systems are in place they tend to stay in place.

That's why getting into the phone market is so important to Microsoft. If they can't break in soon they never will. It may already be too late.

MOD PARENT UP (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32951070)

Troll? Seriously? This guy is dead on. I'm never buying another Windows phone again because MS proved to me that their mobile OS sucked and continues to suck.
 
We got MS fanboys here or fifth graders with modpoints or what?

My question is... (5, Interesting)

Mongoose Disciple (722373) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950720)

Is this a release that, purely on quality/merit (let's not talk about mindshare or openness -- presumably both are lost causes), is at all competitive with the alternatives?

In a sense it's amazing to me, given how much longer Microsoft's been trying to get something done in the Mobile arena, that they have been completely unable to gain any traction so far. Were Windows CE etc. trying too hard to be compatible with Desktop Windows? I don't know, but it's baffling that a company with so much of a headstart over would now be its chief competitors managed so little.

It's hard to point to openness as the reason with Apple's walled garden as a ready counterpoint, but what did go wrong?

Re:My question is... (3, Insightful)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950832)

I had a Win CE device, and the problem was that the Desktop paradigm doesn't really translate very well to mobile devices. Pushing it to the netbooks is a bit of a stretch, but by the time you get to PDAs and mobile phones it completely breaks down. The iPhone and Android UIs work a lot better for screens that size, I think that they might even translate up to around about the netbook range without a whole lot of trouble, but then again trying to go beyond that point would likely cause trouble in that they're meant for small devices.

Re:My question is... (0, Troll)

arkane1234 (457605) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951232)

Pushing it to the netbooks is a bit of a stretch,

Funny, last I booted I swore my netbook was a computer and not a phone.
Granted, it's not a Spore-capable system, but it's still a desktop just like most were when XP came out.
Unless you're talking about screen real estate, which then you're just getting dick-size into the picture. Especially since if you're desk based temporarily, you can VGA cable it to a monitor.

Re:My question is... (0)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951394)

The UIs might work better, but you can get a whole lot more done with a real OS than a dumbed-down one. Yes, Android is nice, yes I run it on my phone but I wouldn't ever think of putting it on something bigger than a phone because then you can't really -do- anything with it. Yes, Android has a lot of great applications, but my productivity is going to be a lot higher being able to use real programs than Android ones. For example, Open Office, I'm not going to get that on Android because there would be too much to rewrite, I'm not going to get a really, really great browser on Android that supports all the features Firefox does, etc.

I used my 7 inch EEE with Xubuntu on it for my primary laptop for about half a year, the biggest problem wasn't the software I had running it, but rather simply limitations of the hardware (small keyboard, small screen, slow CPU, not much RAM) and putting Android, iOS, Windows Phone 7, etc. on it wouldn't have made it any better.

Never a head start (4, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950842)

I don't know, but it's baffling that a company with so much of a headstart over would now be its chief competitors managed so little.

The thing is, they never had a head start at all - because they were always going down a different path. It's not so much compatibility with Desktop WIndows, as it was reliance on a stylus and a physical keyboard.

Android and iOS were built from the ground up to make use of touch. Neither iOS or Android (to some extent) are reliant even on a physical keyboard, though one can be present... for small mobile devices that simply is a better path, and one Microsoft never chose to explore.

So it's not so much Desktop compatibility, as it is trying to simply move the existing UI conventions to mobile (unless that is what you meant by compatibility).

Re:Never a head start (1)

Mongoose Disciple (722373) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951048)

So it's not so much Desktop compatibility, as it is trying to simply move the existing UI conventions to mobile (unless that is what you meant by compatibility).

It wasn't, but that's a really interesting observation.

I kind of hate touchscreens (especially on something like an mp3 player -- buttons I can operate without looking at decreases my chance of dying while driving or running) but I have to agree that on something like today's incarnation of a smartphone, there isn't any other form of UI that's even competitive in terms of its appropriateness, and it makes sense that whoever "gets" that first is really who has the headstart.

Re:Never a head start (3, Insightful)

samkass (174571) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951052)

Android and iOS were built from the ground up to make use of touch.

Every prototype of Android device looked like a Blackberry until the iPhone came out. At that point Android bolted on their multi-touch look and feel... there's no "ground up" design relating to touch in either the iPhone or Android. The core OS just handles files, memory, network, power, processes, etc. Apple could replace UIKit eventing with some keyboard/stylus-based input API and replace a small fraction of iOS.

To get it right takes a lot more than the touch UI being right. It takes an entire infrastructure to make the device disappear and become the task. Despite Microsoft's size, they've never been an infrastructure company so it'll be a challenge.

Oh God...The Fanboyism. It Burns! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32951138)

Someone needs to smack the fuck out of you.

No wonder the entire world is laughing their asses off at Apple and its piece of shit iPhone 4 with fanboys like this dipshit out there.

Re:Never a head start (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951248)

Can you point me at some pictures? Every android prototype I've seen looked like an iPhone rival (mytouch 3g basically). Considering Android, from the get go, has been looking to directly compete with Apple, frankly, I'm not sure that prototypes really have anything to do with anything.

You need to keep in mind, especially during early development, its not uncommon to develop on easily obtainable, low cost hardware simply because actual production units are not available, available in low yields, or too cost prohibitive to make widely available to developers right out the gate. In other words, its not uncommon or even unreasonable for development prototypes to have absolutely no form factor in common with production hardware. In fact, they are often even missing core hardware - GPS or phone/dsp chips. None of that means it has any influence on its true market goals or direction.

Re:Never a head start (3, Informative)

tayhimself (791184) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951618)

Not sure why you couldn't google it, but none of the google images show devices looking anything like iPhones. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Android+prototypes [lmgtfy.com]

Re:Never a head start (1)

samkass (174571) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952072)

Can you point me at some pictures? Every android prototype I've seen looked like an iPhone rival (mytouch 3g basically).

Considering Google had been making Android prototypes since before the original iPhone was ever released to the public, I'll ask you the same question... can you find any pictures of any Android prototypes that look like the iPhone but pre-date its unveiling?

I can't.

If I go to Google Images and google for Android Prototypes, I get lots of things that look like a Blackberry and nothing that even remotely resembles an iPhone... until the iPhone is released. Then about 6 months later the Android prototypes start looking (surprise!) like an iPhone.

Re:Never a head start (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952348)

Also, I believe Android took a few production versions before there was any multi-touch. The hardware supported it, but it wasn't until HTC Sense UI for Android came out that any form real multi-touch came into play and even that sucked initially (I know it sucked on the HTC Hero immensely). 2.1+ is better these days at least... but most of the Android UI core is still very single-touch oriented.

Re:My question is... (1)

iniquitous (122242) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951190)

From a technical perspective, Microsoft's task is fairly monumental. Windows CE runs on a broad spectrum of devices under a broad spectrum of roles. iOS, Android, etc are specifically created for one market: smart phones (and in the case of iOS, very tightly controlled hardware within that market). In contrast, Microsoft wants Windows CE to be a foundation platform for a wide variety of mobile markets.

From a business perspective, who knows whether this approach is truly smart or unwise. It's clear, however, that the general public perceives that Microsoft is going to be very late and potentially very under-featured in the consumer smart phone market when Windows Phone 7 releases.

Re:My question is... (1)

gad_zuki! (70830) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951342)

>It's hard to point to openness as the reason with Apple's walled garden as a ready counterpoint, but what did go wrong?

This has nothing to do with openness and has everything to do with MS giving up on improving their products. The WinMobile line, at the time, was pretty hot stuff. You could install whatever program you wanted and there was no shortage of apps. I remember owning a Treo on Sprin't EVDO network and calling Russia on Skype on EVDO. I'm not sure what phone lets me do that today. iPhone has AT&T imposed limitations on VOIP and there's no official Skype client for Android.

Windows Mobile got the same treatment IE6 got. MS felt it was good enough and its main competitors like Palm and Blackberry were doing a worse job than them somehow. It wasn't until the iphone came out that MS was forced to up its game, but it was a little too late. They tried to bank on WinMo 6.1/6.5 but it just had too many legacy limitations. Or at least polish 6.5 to the point where people would buy it while 7 was being developed, but competing products like the Pre, Droids, and iPhones were just much better. The 7 rewrite is turning into a Vista fiasco that's just taking too long and no one wants to wait, especially with native ActiveSync on iPhone and Android.

In other words Android/iPhone are like Firefox to MS's IE. MS can't sit on products in competitive markets. Someone will always eat their lunch.

Re:My question is... (2, Insightful)

CODiNE (27417) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951798)

It's hard to point to openness as the reason with Apple's walled garden as a ready counterpoint, but what did go wrong?

One part may be what I recently noticed with my wife and her iPad. You see she immediately wanted one instead of a laptop, and she's immensely more satisfied with it than her previous (more powerful) laptop. Here's one reason why iOS is successful.

She can install apps on her own. Previously I'd tried to train her on this... you find the download link on the website (not always easy). You go to the downloads folder (she forgets where it is). You locate the file you just downloaded (forgot what it's name was, or the name doesn't match the app). Double-click it to get the disk image open (the what?) then either drag and drop the app on the Applications folder OR run the Installer if it's set up that way (huh?)

Now she just goes to the store with one tap. Hits the little search button, types draw or whatever... checks out the apps, and clicks Install. It's done.

I believe the mobile app stores such as Apple's and the Android store (there is one on the phone right?) significantly lower the barrier of entry to trying out new apps on the device. For us downloading and installing are simple as can be, but to a non-techie it's just a fog of gibberish and confusing steps. Most people don't install ANY new apps on their computers, it takes a "power user" to download and install Google Earth. You hear people like that say "I hate computers" but really it's the basic file system management and app installation process they can't grok.

So yes, openness and the "walled garden" is a significant part of Apple and Google's success. It's not so much a "cool factor" as it is a eureka! moment to people when they too can try new things on their device. The model of downloading an app on the computer, plugging in a phone and then using some sort of installer process is a bit overwhelming for the majority of people. Simplifying the phones has empowered the common user.

Re:My question is... (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952116)

My wife and the iPad had the same experience - while she is certainly more tech oriented, she hate messing with it, when a click on a user-friendly app store lets her try a large variation of applications available with prices obviously displayed. I, personally, have no use for the iPad, but I see why people like it so much and why they'd rather have one over a netbook.

Re:My question is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32951972)

If anyone wants to know why CE didnt gain traction? Ask what it costs. It is not an insignificant cost, PER phone. There is a reason there are dozens of *good* android phones on the horizon.

iPhone nailed the reason people want smart phones. They want to fiddle with something while they are standing around. MS never got that. They built a supper locked down platform that sucked to get any apps onto. So you ended up with a glorified personal organizer and hopefully someone compiled some app for your particular CE flavor (ie almost never). Then when you did manage to get some sort of app running each one took a bit of fiddling to install. Oh and dont reset your phone if you like to keep all of your apps. Never mind the crap ActiveSync was.

So they were finicky, pricey, and little better than electronic personal organizers. Yeah no wonder many people gave them a skip.

Once MS figures it out. Then they will start coming out with an OS for phones worth a damn. So far it doesnt look like they will.

Cool - Does It... (3, Funny)

filesiteguy (695431) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950876)

...run Linux? :)

Did a bit of research already.... (1)

HerculesMO (693085) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950878)

And to develop apps in WinMo7 is ridiculously easy. I think that's what will help the platform move along.

Of course, if they don't fix up and finish some of the features that Engadget and other sites are pointing out, they will be DOA.

I'm going to buy an Android phone next week and if WinMo7 shapes up well, then I'll probably swap to that. With the ability for devs to port their games from XNA into the phone pretty easily, for new apps to be written quickly, and a standardization of UI and hardware requirements (including buttons and layout), it has an edge on Android in some areas. Of course, the little features that people love in Android or iOS are what they have to match in order to make it.

Time will tell.

Re:Did a bit of research already.... (1)

it0 (567968) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950968)

And to develop apps in WinMo7 is ridiculously easy. I think that's what will help the platform move along.

So show me!

Re:Did a bit of research already.... (0, Flamebait)

uprise78 (1256084) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951540)

Easy, yes. But you're stuck in Silverlight (unless making a game)! What a pile of shit. It has already proven even with Microsoft's massive Silverlight push that it cant even beat the equally shitty Flash. Now they are forcing Silverlight into the mobile space? I guess they figured it will never gain traction on the desktop so why not force people to use it on mobile and maybe they will then decide to use it on the desktop... Maybe the ploy will work. Hopefully it wont. The last thing we need is shitty "developers" hacking together shitty mobile apps then releasing them as desktop apps and web apps. *shudders*

Re:Did a bit of research already.... (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952048)

Silverlight is just a fancy term for a mobile version of .NET these days (well, that is my take on it) - it will probably replace the compact framework ultimately (as that was for CE devices in the past). Comparing Flash and Silverlight is a bit odd as, at first glance, look like rich media platforms for the web - however, Silverlight has a fairly robust development framework behind it already and I am very sure that the WP7 OS and the requirements to have it on a phone will make it run more than adequately. So basically, it is just a variation of the .NET framework... which was pretty much a no-brainer.

Re:Did a bit of research already.... (1)

Mongoose Disciple (722373) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952194)

Silverlight is just a fancy term for a mobile version of .NET these days (well, that is my take on it)

Close -- it's essentially a subset. (At least, that's my take on it, and I also think you're probably right that at some point it essentially replaces the compact framework.)

Re:Did a bit of research already.... (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952250)

That is correct, as the Compact Framework was a subset also. Silverlight is more media focused than CE, I think. I haven't used either that much (even though I do a lot of .NET dev in general, I am more focused on web apps and services).

Re:Did a bit of research already.... (1)

uprise78 (1256084) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952374)

Silverlight is just a fancy term for a mobile version of .NET these days (well, that is my take on it)

That is partially correct. The big thing about Silverlight that is different is that you are forced to use WPF and XAML for your GUI. Painful to say the least.

What else was easy (1, Troll)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950996)

And to develop apps in WinMo7 is ridiculously easy. I think that's what will help the platform move along.

Developing for PalmOS was easy. And the iPhone at the start, with web apps...

For some reason users seem dissatisfied with a limited programming model that is easier on the developer but results in less featureful applications.

Microsoft's Shit Dev Tools (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32951022)

XNA? The biggest piece of shit game development tools are going to help Microsoft's phone?

You have to be joking...

Re:Did a bit of research already.... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32951776)

XNA is not DirectX. Not C++. Not OpenGL.

Not many XNA games out there when comparing it to directX and OpenGL.

So, the porting of games is not as easy as you think.

Feedback (1)

dimethylxanthine (946092) | more than 4 years ago | (#32950926)

Yeah, putting our thumbs, which took quite a few years to evolve, as opposed to using prehistoric tools to operate the touchscreen would certainly be nice. Who uses stylus these days anyway, Nokia?? And while you're at it, why not think about getting your kernel and hardware stacks from people like OpenMoko next time you need to "revamp" the whole OS - would certainly put those millions to much better use, generate interest from a substantial market previously unavailable to MS, and sparking that comeptitive zeal among the biggies again. Hell, HP are doing it and both them and Palm are happy. But yeah I digress... Please fix the touch screen.

Anonymous Coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32951010)

"finish the best Windows Phone release ever together"

Isn't this the only Windows Phone release ever?

Re:Anonymous Coward (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951304)

It's still the absolute best!

"Don't bother with this disaster" (2, Interesting)

yelvington (8169) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951174)

From http://www.infoworld.com/d/mobilize/windows-phone-7-dont-bother-disaster-211?page=0,0 [infoworld.com]

There's no kind way to say it: Windows Phone 7 will be a failure. Announced to much bravado in February as the platform that would breathe life into Microsoft's mobile ambitions, Windows Phone 7 looked based on very early previews as if it might bring something new and exciting to the table. Back then, I noted that I was impressed by what I saw -- with the caveat "so far."

No caveats now: Windows Phone 7 is a waste of time and money. It's a platform that no carrier, device maker, developer, or user should bother with. Microsoft should kill it before it ships and admit that it's out of the mobile game for good. It is supposed to ship around Christmas 2010, but anyone who gets one will prefer a lump of coal. I really mean that.

Re:"Don't bother with this disaster" (1)

lwriemen (763666) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951462)

Sounds like Microsoft hasn't learned much from it's AutoPC days. If this article is on target, then the phone companies probably shouldn't waste time developing Windows Phone 7 platforms.

Re:"Don't bother with this disaster" (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951600)

Thanks for the link. Virtual +1 powerup from me.

And... ouch. Harsh, but no surprises. After the Zune and Kin debacles, not to mention... well, ever other version of WinME/Mobile... you'd have to be pretty risk-tolerant to bet on Microsoft doing anything other than their usual half-arsed emulate-abandon-dump strategy with Mobile 7.

Re:"Don't bother with this disaster" (3, Interesting)

benjymouse (756774) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951746)

From http://www.zdnet.com/blog/cell-phones/microsoft-windows-phone-7-technical-preview-a-definitive-guide/4286?pg=8&tag=mantle_skin;content [zdnet.com]

Windows Phone 7 is a huge departure for the smartphone group at Microsoft and takes quite a radical approach to the way people use their phones. Unlike the iPhone, Google Android, and Palm webOS, WP7 is not focused on the application experience, but is centered on helping you interact with the people you want to and complete the tasks you need to complete with apps mainly working in the background or having other technologies (like Bing Search) do better at meeting your needs without more apps.

The current experience is amazingly stable and fluid and I am quite impressed with what they have done. It has taken some time and they were pretty much out of competing for customers for most of this year, but it looks like they will come out firing with all they have this coming holiday season.

Yes but look what he used it for... (1, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952324)

From the article:

My typical day consisted of sending and receiving lots of text messages and email messages through various accounts, checking my Facebook feeds, using Twitter through the Dabr.co.uk mobile Twitter site (Microsoft please get Twitter integration or an app added soon), managing my appointments, and checking out friends' photos.

Wouldn't that also be a great description of the Kin's strengths?

Although I think Kin was able to work with Twitter...

Re:"Don't bother with this disaster" (1)

Minwee (522556) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951980)

No matter how poorly Windows Phone 7 does, Microsoft has done everything in its power to ensure that it lasts longer than its predecessor, the Kin.

They should drop "Windows" from the name. (2, Interesting)

aapold (753705) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951186)

And "mobile". Hell, just called it Seven.

Re:They should drop "Windows" from the name. (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951590)

You say that now... until it puts your girlfriend's head in a box for you!

Re:They should drop "Windows" from the name. (1)

jez9999 (618189) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951790)

I was thinking more along the lines of Jeri Ryan..... and curves, for that matter...

Re:They should drop "Windows" from the name. (1)

Locutus (9039) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951944)

Maybe they should call it the Microsoft Kin. Oh wait a minute...

LoB

Corporate "improvements" will kill the device... (3, Funny)

sargeUSMC (905860) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951202)

My guess is that the thing that will kill this device (like most MS devices that have to compete in a market they haven't cornered), is the fact that by the time the management, sales, and the lawyer teams get done "improving" the device, you won't be able to do anything on it without having to pay through the nose. Repeatedly. Forever.

So, even if the device ends up being a marvel of technology (which seems unlikely given the MS mobile paradigm), it will end up being locked behind a walled garden, which is locked up in a castle, surrounded by a moat, filled with alligators, etc. Sorry, couldn't resist a little hyperbole.

Re:Corporate "improvements" will kill the device.. (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951372)

Let's hope they don't go the route of RIM and basically make it so anything cool on the phone required a Blackberry Enterprise server, which licensed your ass.
Nearly everything aside from browsing required a BES.
I guess in MS's case, it'd be Microsoft Enterprise Server, just to be original ;)

Re:Corporate "improvements" will kill the device.. (1)

sargeUSMC (905860) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951664)

Yep – The corporate philosophy of “how do we take our new product and pigeon-hole it into existing products to force users to purchase/upgrade/buy extensions for those products ?” seems to be what will doom this product regardless of its “techniness”.

Re:Corporate "improvements" will kill the device.. (3, Insightful)

Locutus (9039) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951834)

while that might be true with RIM, RIM is probably quite happy to be _the_ enterprise messaging phone and the last time I looked, RIM made a good profit. Microsoft on the other hand, loses hundreds of millions annually on Windows CE based products and has since the late '90s. And there is nothing wrong with a company being good at their market and being good enough their products are _picked_ over the competition.

Microsoft does not see things this way. They must own the market and they are willing to spend billions to do that and they have. Profits from Windows desktop based software( WIndows OS, MS Office, and Windows Server ) make up ~90% of Microsoft profits. Microsoft execs live and breath by the now infamous "Does anybody remember Windows?" statement Bill Gates made in the mid '90s when Microsoft product managers and engineers were crafting Microsoft's Java product list. That statement and the following directives from Bill and other executives turned Microsofts Java products into products whos purpose was to tie customers to Windows, not enable Microsoft to compete for customers and profits. They already had the profits from Windows and losing those profits are more important than winning new profits. IMO

And Adobe would be a fool to put any effort, funded or not, into putting Flash on a Microsoft phone product. Microsoft may not have dissed Adobe like Apple did but their Silverlight is directly targeting Flash just as .NET was and is designed to tie vendors to Windows instead of having platform choices which Java provides.

LoB

Hmm (2, Insightful)

jav1231 (539129) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951254)

Seriously, if they're building a phone OS at this point in the game, it better offer a paradigm shift. Otherwise, it's the Kin or at best the Zune, relegated!

Re:Hmm (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951430)

I agree... although I wonder how much resentment from the community is effecting the ultimate bottomline of anything new.
Pavlovian conditioning has taught people that Microsoft = drawing you in to cook you slowly.
Once you're out of the pot a couple of times, you learn that pots are bad. Unfortunately, corporations are a little slow, but people are far more pocket-conscious.

Re:Hmm (2, Insightful)

jav1231 (539129) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951774)

I think people, to some extent, are at a point where everything Microsoft doesn't hold as much sway. It used to be that Microsoft mated everything well to its OS. All of their server offerings give you Windows as the basic GUI (something I think they did TOO much of). WinCE was an attempt to do what Apple did very well, scale the basic OS down. But Apple re-wrote the GUI for the phone. WinCE looked like Windows crammed into a phone.
That said, the hurdle is very high for Microsoft. Of late, they haven't done a lot to clear hurtles, only match them at best but with lost momentum. I contend that it's an Apple / Android world on smartphones for some time to come. Microsoft has an insatiable lust for doing what everyone else does. It looks like Windows Phone 7 will be to smartphones what Bing is to Google, Zune is to iPod.

Re:Hmm (3, Insightful)

Locutus (9039) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952146)

"Microsoft = drawing you in to cook you slowly"? Most consumers still have no clue but what they do have a clue about is that Apple made a phone/PDA sexy and you are _in_ if you have one. It helps too that they are easy to use and work well( except if you hold the 4 a certain way ). Android brings the easy to use UI to a plethora of devices which don't have the Apple cool factor but has the easy to use and is useful but it also brings customers to all the other hardware vendors with very little upfront costs for the OS/software.

And those hardware vendors know what it is like in the PC and netbook segment where Microsoft is threatening them and dictating product development and marketing and they do not want any part of that. This is why Windows Phone 7 will fail. No matter how much they offer companies to sell Windows Phone 7, they will not be able to pull exclusionary and exclusive deals like they did with netbooks and PCs and because of that, there is no sexy in Windows. In the end, only Microsoft zealots will purchase Windows Phone 7 phones and a handful of business managers will dictate to staff to use only those phones "because they are a Windows shop".

What's worst, at a time when Microsoft's investors are wondering where the growth has gone, Microsoft will have to pump hundreds of millions quarterly into just marketing this thing and it'll show up on the books. Not to mention the hundreds of millions Microsoft is probably already starting to pump into the tablet segment attempting to not only stem ARM Linux or Android based tablets but also iPad growth. I don't see the 4th quarter looking good at all for Microsoft investors. Desktop Windows, MS Office, and Windows Server will still make them billions, but once again, billions in losses and no indication of success outside of Windows will pull down the stock even further. IMO

LoB

What is the milestone? (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951276)

has today reached its biggest milestone yet,

So what exactly is the milestone? I'm used to milestones being a big logical-AND of finally successfully achieving a bunch of technical requirements. This seems to be a "marketing milestone"?

The concept of a "milestone" from hiking or whatever, is that according to the surveyors you've come exactly 5280 feet since the last milestone. Not "here is a pretty picture", or "we figured we'd generate some buzz by placing the milestone here".

As a side question to all you hikers from the civilized world, do you guys have "kilo-stones" or whatever? Seriously?

Re:What is the milestone? (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951488)

As a side question to all you hikers from the civilized world, do you guys have "kilo-stones" or whatever? Seriously?
I wouldn't doubt it... it's just a number.
Whatever the culture of a region deems a tool is a tool, is my guess.

I kept hoping ... (1)

bkeahl (1688280) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951578)

I'm running Windows Mobile 6.x on my HTC and have been holding out waiting for 7 to see if they were going to jump the other players in the game.

It looks more like they stumbled, tried to avoid the mud puddle, and landed in the horse manure instead.

I much prefer the 6.x interface with the HTC Home front-end. I only stuck with the Windows platform because of the ability to email sync with a PC-based client (Outlook).

Great. I'm also running XP and 2k because Vista and 7 seemed to toss the good and introduce more trouble.

Too bad Linux hasn't come up with a worthy GUI/WinAPI package. If it weren't for supporting clients I'd walk away on the PC side. Windows Phone 7 has pretty much convinced me the to leave them on the PDA side.

So... (1)

KshGoddess (454304) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951604)

"We've got the software running, someone give us some hardware to run it on!"?

Seems a bit bass-ackwards to me. But then again, it's windows. Sorry, "Windows Phone 7."

Does that mean (1)

Ranger (1783) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951626)

it will place and receive calls without giving you the "blue screen of death"?

"I'm sorry your call to 9-1-1 cannot be placed at this time because your phone is rebooting. Please try your call later."

Awwww (1)

pythonboy (1627121) | more than 4 years ago | (#32951644)

From the app store certification requirements...

Content not allowed: Content that depicts or suggests prostitution.

Well that rules out any MS Office interaction.

Just checking... (1)

jimboindeutchland (1125659) | more than 4 years ago | (#32952016)

I actually though most of it looked pretty good (in the cnet demo anyway) and I'd really like to see a bit of extra competition in this space.

But I just wanted to check: now that we all hate Apple, is it ok to like Microsoft stuff now?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>