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 8 Officially Unveiled

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the solid-color-rectangles dept.

Windows 414

BogenDorpher writes with news that Microsoft has officially introduced Windows Phone 8. The new version of their mobile operating system will bring support for processors with up to 64 cores, as well as resolutions higher than 800x480 — up to 1280x768. It will also include better support for NFC and microSD cards. One important thing to note is that Windows Phone 8 won't be coming to current Windows Phone devices.

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

64 cores (5, Funny)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#40387865)

Now I can buy a Windows Phone to warm my hands on in the winter.

Re:64 cores (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40387919)

Scientific calculations on the go!

Re:64 cores (5, Insightful)

kthreadd (1558445) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388237)

Or just Flash.

Re:64 cores (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40387925)

Re:64 cores (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388183)

It's not related news, but if you label your food as being kosher, it better be fucking kosher.

Would you still be bitching if it was about peanut residue and people were dying because those allergic to peanuts were unhappy with the food not being non-peanut enough for them?

Re:64 cores (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388243)

Yep. People with such stupid allergies should be culled from the gene pool. It's not like eating these 'non-Kosher' Jew dogs hurts them in any way.

Re:64 cores (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388361)

If you bought a computer that said "8 GB ram" and it only had 4 GB of ram, you'd be cool with that? Or would you be upset cause it was "non 8 GB ram" enough for you? After all its not hurting you in any way!

Re:64 cores (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388439)

Really trying hard on this aren't you, Jewboy? No, I wouldn't care. 4 gig sticks are 20 bucks. I make that in less than 30 minutes of working.

I'm excited (2)

noh8rz3 (2593935) | more than 2 years ago | (#40387897)

Hopefully if windows phone 8 comes out, the windows phone seven like the Nokia lumia will be available on pre paid carriers like vmo.

Re:I'm excited (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388133)

yay i love non upgradeable phones from dying companies too! im sooo excited. i hope to get paid this week from the troll fund.
 

Re:I'm excited (2, Informative)

Haxagon (2454432) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388305)

It's upgradeable to Windows Phone 7.8, AC. Plus, a Windows Phone on Virgin Mobile would be a lot better than the cheap, often laggy Android devices they have.

Frosty piss (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40387899)

God i love this meme

Why such a low maximum resolution? (5, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#40387903)

Why would you limit the max res like that?

Why not design it to scale from the very beginning so you don't have to hack it on later?

Why they could not support smp from the beginning had me wondering as well.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40387963)

Why would you limit the max res like that?

Why not design it to scale from the very beginning so you don't have to hack it on later?

Why they could not support smp from the beginning had me wondering as well.

Why does M$ do any of the dumb shit they do?

Because Balmer is fat and sweaty and touches himself at night. That's why.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (1, Informative)

LittleLebowskiUrbanA (619114) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388317)

Why does M$ do any of the dumb shit they do?

Because Balmer is fat and sweaty and touches himself at night. That's why.

Haters gotta hate.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (5, Interesting)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388343)

Why does M$ do any of the dumb shit they do?

Because Balmer is fat and sweaty and touches himself at night. That's why.

Partly; yes; it's because their managment are idiots. But there's a deeper reason, and it's the reason why IBM took so long to release a decent PC in the first place and ended up having to buy in a system from MS. The are afraid of cannibalizing their main market. They want to "differentiate" from market to market. That means that the x86 tablet gets a stylus whilst the ARM tablets don't get access to tradiitional apps. That means that you will get a "Windows XX - Pro" edition which costs $2000 but is the only way to get some of the "power user" features.

When Apple came out with one phone which did everything for everybody, suddenly you could just add a rubber cover and use your business phone (which needed a calendar) for sport (where you need non-scratch glass). That destroyed a whole market which was used to providing separate phones for each different group of people. Microsoft wants to reinstate that kind of division. I expect the same success as IBM had in blocking the development of personal computers.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (4, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#40387971)

Why would you limit the max res like that? Why not design it to scale from the very beginning so you don't have to hack it on later?

It's mainly to make things easier for app developers so that they have specific resolutions to target. Much like the iOS ecosystem.

Arguably, this made more sense back when there was just one resolution, less so when there are three...

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (4, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#40387995)

I still don't really get this. If I was put in charge of such a thing, I would be looking at making everything 2d SVGs or similar. So long as the ratios stay fairly similar it should not be such a huge deal to support a lot of different display sizes.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (5, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388083)

You're probably not a designer - these guys are crazy about things being pixel perfect, which can be hard to achieve with vector graphics. Apple does the same thing here.

For Metro, though, it makes less sense due to its emphasis on simple flat shapes and typography over colorful icons. Yes, personally, I also don't see much point in not using vector graphics for a Metro app and having it scale seamlessly. And the UI framework already has flexible layouts and such, so really there's no excuse to not make it all scale nicely.

Interestingly enough, there is no set of predefined resolutions for Win8 Metro. So there isn't much consistency here. I hope that WP would eventually follow the big brother, of course.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (5, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388125)

Pixel perfect positioning is brain dead. I regularly laugh at ones who attempt to do such things with webpages. PROTIP: YOUR FONTS MIGHT NOT BE MY FONTS!

WP seems very well designed to not need it. The simple tiles would scale very well to any resolution. I would have thought this forward looking design was for that very purpose.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (2)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388479)

You misunderstood. I was not referring to pixel perfect positioning, but rather pixel perfect bitmaps (icons and such).

From a technical standpoint, WP application framework (which is Silverlight, with XAML for markup language) is well designed [microsoft.com] to enable scaling and flexible UI layouts.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388505)

PROTIP: YOUR FONTS MIGHT NOT BE MY FONTS!

This would be more laughable if CSS wasn't a complete flaming pile of shit when it comes to sizing elements with respect to the size of the text they contain. Pixel perfect or not.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (0)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388089)

Yeah and everyone will love your extremely sluggish device. Even the embedded libraries for SVG are still noticeable slower than raster graphics.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (4, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388155)

The SVGs only need to be turned into rasters at install time, storage is cheap. The display resolution is not going to change after that.

Try less trolling and more thinking.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (4, Informative)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388187)

To make it even faster you can generate the ones for common display sizes at build time. The device can even delete the files that do not match resolutions it supports during install to save local storage space.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388265)

Yeah, because ponting out facts is now apparently "trolling". *rolls eyes*

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388417)

What fact was that?
You setup a strawman, that I meant SVGs for local use on the phone in realtime, and knocked it over.

If you don't want to be accused of trolling, try a less trollish username.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (4, Insightful)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388111)

The irony is that Microsoft has traditionally had really good support for vector graphics in the UI (Windows 95 was nearly resolution-independent, except for the icons.) It's only now, in the devices that are making headway into high DPI, that they screw that up!

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388105)

If they wanted to make it easy for app developers, they should have picked a popular resolution.

1280 x 768 isn't common.

Better choices include 1280 x 800 or 1366 x 768. Maybe they couldn't decide between these and just combined them.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (2)

INeededALogin (771371) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388369)

1280 x 768 isn't common.

Computer Monitors [wikipedia.org]

Looks pretty popular to me. The lesson... Microsoft typically does its homework when copying.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (4, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388509)

1280 x 768 isn't common.

We're talking phones here, not desktops or netbooks. 1280x768 is pretty common for phones now (Galaxy Nexus etc).

Re: because micro$hit are idiots. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40387987)

what else ? its a slow lumbering dino getting eaten by mammals like google and apple.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (2)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388099)

Why would you want more than 1280x720 on a mobile phone? It's enough to get a very high ppi on a 5" device like the Galaxy Note. As for SMP, the old WP7 was just WinCE with a Silverlight front-end. This one is based on NT.

It looks like a decent OS. By all credible accounts, WP7 was a decent OS if you disregarded everything that wasn't its UI (which is to say it is a good UI on a crap OS), whereas this thing looks like it might be pretty damn good. I'd actually consider a Nokia PureView WP8 phone with a decent screen.

Just too bad for the few who actually bought WP7 devices and won't get upgrades to WP8 at all, with no backwards compatibility for apps not recompiled for WP7.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388239)

On the Rezound that resolution is fine, but on a device like the Note 1920x1080 would be great. On my Nexus it is already a bit too low.

If this one is NT based it should be able to support single core CPUs just fine.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (1)

shadowrat (1069614) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388301)

maybe so you could drive a larger display like a projector or tv?

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (1)

LtGordon (1421725) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388329)

Why would you want more than 1280x720 on a mobile phone?

Yeah, and why should anybody want more than 640K for their desktop either?

In all seriousness, if support for future devices with higher-resolution screens is so ridiculous, then why design Windows Phone 8 to be capable of running on 64 cores? I don't see many 64-core phones floating around right now either.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (5, Informative)

iamhassi (659463) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388149)

Why would you limit the max res like that?

to make us buy windows phone 9 supporting HD in 2013/14... which probably won't work on current windows phone 8 devices.

Sorry M$, everything was good until " Windows Phone 8 won't be coming to current Windows Phone devices". A 2009 iPhone [wikipedia.org] runs 2012 iOS 5.1.1, [wikipedia.org] and I have to tell you it's been pretty nice not having to throw away my phone every time a new OS comes out and being able to download the "latest and greatest" apps because everything new works on my old phone. After all, it's a phone first, not a PC, I don't like the idea of having to throw out my phone with all my contacts and info and all the cases and chargers and everything I've spent supporting it. I don't mind the constant upgrades on a PC, that's the nature of the beast, but I don't want to go through the same mess with my phone. Oh, and my 2009 iPhone will support 2013 iOS 6. [theverge.com] Wow, say what you want about Apple, but sometimes they just get it.

Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388279)

My Calculator tells me that this amounts to > 300 ppi until you get to sizes over 4.9 inch, what more do you want?

Won't work on current phones? (5, Insightful)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40387915)

QUOTE: "Microsoft tirelessly pushed the idea that its saving grace, the Nokia Lumia 900, was the next big thing in smartphones. However, the fact that the Lumia 900..... won't be able to update will undoubtedly leave some owners of these devices feeling hung out..... Without the software update, potential customers will basically have no reason to snag a Lumia 900, a Titan II, or any other Windows Phone device for that matter, until Windows Phone 8 is available."

This move reminds me of when Apple stopped supporting PPC devices. The article says WinPh8 won't support single-core devices. I wonder why? That would be equivalent to them releasing Windows 7 and saying, "Won't support Pentium 4 or other single-cores."

Re:Won't work on current phones? (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#40387947)

I agree that it seems very odd.

Why would you care how many cores it has? Not like having an OS that can use 1-XXX cores is a new thing.

Re:Won't work on current phones? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40387991)

It worked very well for desktop Windows - Microsoft writes the minimum requirements in order to force hardware manufacturers/OEMs to actually make powerful devices, because vendors want the MS sticker. The result is an upgrade in the product line. This time around, Microsoft is betting on two things that they had with the desktop monopoly that they certainly don't have in the mobile market:

1) Manufacturers will give a damn about supporting WP8
2) Consumers will give a damn about buying WP8

Although if 1 comes true the hardware will swing 2 somewhat.

Re:Won't work on current phones? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388015)

Most of the big features are being backported to Windows Phone 7 in WP7.8 as well, but most of the "key" hardware features have... well.. the hardware to support it.

Re:Won't work on current phones? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388399)

The features are irrelevant when the Windows Phone 8 apps won't work. And they won't according to Microsoft. I am so sad I bought this lumia. I should have bought a real iPhone.

Re:Won't work on current phones? (-1, Troll)

present_arms (848116) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388051)

This move reminds me of when Apple stopped supporting PPC devices. The article says WinPh8 won't support single-core devices. I wonder why? That would be equivalent to them releasing Windows 7 and saying, "Won't support Pentium 4 or other single-cores."

That is because Wph8 need more than one core because it's slow and needs more cores to move at a decent pace hahah

Re:Won't work on current phones? (4, Insightful)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388053)

Microsoft's interests don't include keeping Nokia shares high.

Quite the opposite in fact, if they really are planning to buy them.

Re:Won't work on current phones? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388065)

Not that anyone here reads the articles, but it was explained in an adjacent article. [winbeta.org] Win7 phones will get an upgrade to as close to Win8's mobile format as possible with the hardware in the prior models. Without diving fully into the hardware specs, I can't tell you if there is a significant internal difference other than cpu count, but the article sounds like there are a lot of changes in the new hardware requirements.

Re:Won't work on current phones? (1)

Haxagon (2454432) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388119)

The single-core stuff will still get Windows Phone 7.8

Re:Won't work on current phones? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388203)

Which is still bullshit as Windows Phone 7.8 devices won't support Windows Phone 8 apps.

Re:Won't work on current phones? (1)

lilfields (961485) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388367)

I don't think that's true, perhaps some app features won't be supported. Then again, with WP's low market share making a huge switch like this is a lot less damaging than if, say, Apple had done it. But I am fairly certain that WP7 will be able to run some WP8 apps.

Re:Won't work on current phones? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388169)

Yeah but when Apple stopped supporting PPC, they gave customers one additional version of OS X (Leopard) and two years notice for the transition after they announced their intention. Consumers who bought a WP7 phone are stuck until their contracts expire.

What a lame announcement... (5, Insightful)

Foxman98 (37487) | more than 2 years ago | (#40387969)

It seems they consistantly miss the mark in what consumers want to buy. OK great, 64-cores? who cares? What features does it offer the consumers who are supposed to purchase these to make their day to day lives more productive? Easier? More connected with friends / family?

None of my friends could tell you what WVGA or WXGA is, nor do they probably care.

I live in Boston and see hundreds of of people daily using a variety of phones. I have NEVER seen a Windows phone. not once. Why? Because it makes NO sense to buy one over Android/Iphone.

Microsoft needs to figure out quickly how to incorporate features, functions and uses that NO OTHER company has thought of. Until then, they will remain completely irrelevant and if I were a stock holder in their company, leave me questioning whether all that R&D money is being spent wisely.

it's called hype/fud (2)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388045)

They've always been good at FUD, but never at hype. This is as much of a yawn as always. I wish it were real competition to give apple and google something to actually care or even have to compare to, but it's not.

Re:it's called hype/fud (5, Insightful)

Foxman98 (37487) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388171)

There really isn't even any FUD in this lol - They haven't announced anything that's even remotely interesting.

Oh and it's not compatible with any current phones. brilliant.

Re:it's called hype/fud (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388351)

Which is what he said. They are good at FUD but bad at hype.

This is about hype, and hence is badly done.

Re:What a lame announcement... (1, Interesting)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388087)

None of my friends could tell you what WVGA or WXGA is, nor do they probably care.

I bet all of them can relate to "Retina Display" though...

Re:What a lame announcement... (2)

Foxman98 (37487) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388165)

As much as I hate that marketing term, Apple nails it when it comes to bringing technology to the masses.

Come to think of it, I don't think many of them now it's a "Retina" screen, just that it's "better, brighter and crisper"

Re:What a lame announcement... (5, Informative)

Haxagon (2454432) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388093)

The conference was for developers, mostly. They said they weren't gonna unveil the end-user featureset that they have until closer to launch, probably to avoid what happened last time: all of the Mango features they unveiled were promptly implemented by Apple.

Re:What a lame announcement... (2)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388167)

Microsoft needs to figure out quickly how to incorporate features, functions and uses that NO OTHER company has thought of. Until then, they will remain completely irrelevant

Apple doesn't incorporate features that "NO OTHER company has thought of" - rather, they incorporate features that have been out in the wild for ages, but do them well, and that seems to work for them.

All the hardware points that you go over are important in the grand scheme of things because those were the ones people have been harping on for a long time (and rightly so) with respect to WP7. From user's perspective, yes, user experience is far more important than hardware. On that front, WP8 has two things of note: Nokia (NAVTEQ) maps with full support for offline mode including navigation, and pervasive Skype integration out of the box.

Re:What a lame announcement... (1)

x0d (2506794) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388331)

that may be true, but since WP has next to none user adoption, they will have to bring something new to the table if they want those phones to sell, right?

Re:What a lame announcement... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388235)

It seems they consistantly miss the mark in what consumers want to buy. OK great, 64-cores? who cares? What features does it offer the consumers who are supposed to purchase these to make their day to day lives more productive? Easier? More connected with friends / family?

None of my friends could tell you what WVGA or WXGA is, nor do they probably care.

I live in Boston and see hundreds of of people daily using a variety of phones. I have NEVER seen a Windows phone. not once. Why? Because it makes NO sense to buy one over Android/Iphone.

Microsoft needs to figure out quickly how to incorporate features, functions and uses that NO OTHER company has thought of. Until then, they will remain completely irrelevant and if I were a stock holder in their company, leave me questioning whether all that R&D money is being spent wisely.

To be fair, this was a developer conference, and the first thing that was said on stage according to the live bloggers was that they would not be talking about end-user features.

Re:What a lame announcement... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388295)

Because it makes NO sense to buy one over iPhone.
 
Fixed that for you. Maybe you'll understand when you little kids can get around to buying a real phone.

Re:What a lame announcement... (1)

lilfields (961485) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388403)

"Microsoft needs to figure out quickly how to incorporate features, functions and uses that NO OTHER company has thought of. Until then, they will remain completely irrelevant and if I were a stock holder in their company, leave me questioning whether all that R&D money is being spent wisely." I'm assuming you didn't watch the presentation, Windows Phone had a Siri-esque features for a while before Siri launched. They could have the features and you'd never know it; since as you said you've never seen a Windows Phone, and have obviously never made an effort to try one...which just shows that you're kind of a troll. The emphasis on cores was to show that the OS is versatile and will be around...and a backbone for many years to come.

Re:What a lame announcement... (1)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388445)

Today's event was for hardware and software developers. While some of the issues are related to consumers, they stressed that today's event was not about consumer features.

What's the advantage of so many OSs for Phones? (0)

dryriver (1010635) | more than 2 years ago | (#40387973)

I'm wondering what the advantage of so many different - and incompatible - OSs on Phones is. iOS, Android, Blackberry, now Windows Phone, et cetera. Each with different APP stores, different SDKs and Apps... What's the point of it all? What does it matter where a Smart Phone with hardware specs XX runs Android, iOS or Windows Phone. ---------- The whole things seems like a waste of software developers' finite resources to me (having to develop separate versions of an APP for separate OSs and so forth). -------- Why can't the world of Smart Phones agree on one compatibility standard, and then everything runs fine on every device? -------- Good luck to MS. It may be getting into a fight in the smart phones space that isn't even worth winning. =)

Re:What's the advantage of so many OSs for Phones? (4, Insightful)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388031)

Diversity, you know. Choice. Something that's been missing from the market since Microsoft killed off virtually all of their competitors and established their monopoly.

Why can't the world of Smart Phones agree on one compatibility standard, and then everything runs fine on every device?

Well, that's what HTML5 is for, supposedly. Doesn't mean you're going to get any performance out of it though, which limits its use case. Theoretically that's the problem Java was supposed to solve, but it doesn't really seem to have panned out.

Re:What's the advantage of so many OSs for Phones? (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388139)

Except most consumers hated all the incompatible choices. The average computer user was quite happy to see the useless divergent choices killed off.

Re:What's the advantage of so many OSs for Phones? (2)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388225)

Except most consumers hated all the incompatible choices.

Really? You know this for a fact?

The average computer user was quite happy to see the useless divergent choices killed off.

The average computer user never had the option of using the other choices. Microsoft made sure they were dead and gone from the desktop before Windows ME hit.

Re:What's the advantage of so many OSs for Phones? (5, Funny)

busyqth (2566075) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388131)

I'm wondering what the advantage of so many different - and incompatible - OSs on Phones is. iOS, Android, Blackberry, now Windows Phone, et cetera. Each with different APP stores, different SDKs and Apps... What's the point of it all? What does it matter where a Smart Phone with hardware specs XX runs Android, iOS or Windows Phone. ---------- The whole things seems like a waste of software developers' finite resources to me...

Hey! I think you're right, and you've just given me a great idea.

As a society, we can have some sort of planning organization that decides what the specs will be, then to avoid duplication of effort in manufacturing, the planning board can arrange for the production too. With advanced scientific, statistical analysis, it shouldn't be any problem to figure out exactly how many devices need to be produced, so that we don't waste raw materials by making too many.

In fact, it seems to me like we could take this sort of centralized planning approach with pretty much any industrial product. It's really just a matter of applying scientific principles to industry for the good of society. It would eliminate waste and duplication of effort and make sure that all necessary industrial products are designed and manufactured with optimal efficiency.

Re:What's the advantage of so many OSs for Phones? (1)

shadowrat (1069614) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388385)

I'm certain the makers of any one of those systems sincerely want there to be one single standard system.

How to kill a nonexistant marketshare.... (5, Interesting)

JImbob0i0 (1202835) | more than 2 years ago | (#40387985)

FTA:

... Microsoft announced the successor to its popular Windows Phone 7 platform ... Windows Phone 8 is expected this Fall.

And FTS plus the other article there:

... Microsoft revealed that existing Windows Phone 7.5 users will receive an upgrade to Windows Phone 7.8, and not Windows Phone 8 ...

So windows phone 7 is not selling... solution! Reveal windows phone 8 due in a few months which won't run on any phone bought now.... so better not buy now!

I'm sure this is *really* going to help them sell those phones and gain some marketshare to improve on the nonexistant one they have now... but good news though! The hundreds of thousands of excellent windows phone 7.5 apps will work on windows phone 8 ....

Re:How to kill a nonexistant marketshare.... (3, Funny)

Cro Magnon (467622) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388371)

Step 2: Rename the current WinPhones "Osborn Phones".

Re:How to kill a nonexistant marketshare.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388401)

The hundreds of tens of excellent windows phone 7.5 apps will work on windows phone 8 ....

Native code (4, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#40387999)

The most interesting point by far is arguably native code support, something that was sorely missing from WP7, and made porting apps from iOS and Android incredibly difficult (since you couldn't just share model code in C/C++ between the platforms). Not to mention the perf issues it created for games.

Re:Native code (1)

daniel78 (2563977) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388199)

Yeah, WP7 was a write-off as far as cross platform apps were concerned for this reason (games in particular). They're still (unsurprisingly) pushing DirectX when everyone else is using OpenGL, but its better than nothing, and won't generally require a whole app rewrite.

Re:Native code (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388483)

When every other mobile ecosystem in existence uses OpenGL ES and MS is the odd man out there is no fucking way I am going to bother porting my game over. Stupid stupid stupid MS.

iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 (2)

jmcbain (1233044) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388003)

The iPhone 3GS [wikipedia.org] , which was released in June 2009, is still being sold as Apple's low-end iPhone (usually for $0.99 on a contract), and it runs the current iOS 5. When iOS 6 is released this Fall, the 3GS will run that as well. Yes, there are features that are not available, such as Siri. Now look at Windows Phone. The flagship Nokia Lumia 900 was released in January of 2012, just six months ago, and now it will not be able to run WinPhone 7.

Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 (3, Informative)

Haxagon (2454432) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388071)

It will run 7.8, an update that has most (if not all) of the non-hardware-specific features. The summary is incorrect.

Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 (1, Interesting)

lilfields (961485) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388467)

iOS also isn't running on a full fledged OSX core. Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 share the same core. If Apple were to announce that OSX and iOS now had the same core, they would have to do the exact same thing. This hurts WP7 users, but is great for developers. You can have an App seamlessly operate on all Windows platforms. That's Microsoft's bet, we'll see if it works. I think there is a good chance it will work.

*puke* (1)

jampola (1994582) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388005)

Seriously, that has got to be one of the ugliest phones I have seen in quite a while.

Can't complain. (1)

busyqth (2566075) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388007)

No upgrade path does indeed suck.
But on the other hand, it's better to say straight up that you can't upgrade, than to imply that you can, eventually, when the device manufacture has skinned the OS, and the carrier has signed off on it, 18 months from now, when the next-next version has already been released... Android...

Re:Can't complain. (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388063)

You knew that going in though. Getting a skinned and carrier branded android device means you will lag behind or have to run 3rd party roms.

WinPhone will not have 3rd party roms to let you do that.

Re:Can't complain. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388141)

So the people that bought Windows Phones yesterday and the day before that and last month etc. were told when they bought the device that there would be no upgrade? No? MS is just now telling them after they've bought their phones with no possibility of exchanging them for a refund? Biased much?

Re:Can't complain. (2)

busyqth (2566075) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388471)

Well it is true that I work 16 hours days for approximately $.50 per hour from my company's astroturfing center in Shenzhen.
But actually I am very grateful for my job, because it is better than slinging mud on my father's rice paddy, and my manager even lets me have 2 bathroom breaks per shift so I hardly ever have an accident anymore.
If I hadn't spent 8 years learning English I would be in the factory building glorious iPads, or maybe back at home standing knee deep in leech infested water.

Summary is a lie. (1)

Haxagon (2454432) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388035)

Actually, all 1st gen devices will be getting Windows Phone 7.8, an update without all of the hardware-specific stuff.

Re:Summary is a lie. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388327)

Summary is most certainly not a lie. WP7.8 devices will not be able to run WP8 specific apps. Fucking fragmented shit.

Re:Summary is a lie. (4, Insightful)

oiron (697563) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388397)

Which is fine, except for the marketing.

Apple, on the other hand, says "Oh of course the 3GS runs iOS 6. Some features may not work though...". The version number is meaningless...

What this does is to cannibalize WP7 sales in favour of a not-yet-even-remotely-released WP8!

Re:Summary is a lie. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388413)

Actually, all 1st gen devices will be getting Windows Phone 7.8, an update without all of the hardware-specific stuff.

Yes, but you know you are on Slashdot and the story is about Microsoft right? FUD is to be expected.

microSD cards (1)

willoughby (1367773) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388115)

What does "better support for microSD cards" mean? Were they having problems with reliable reads/writes?

Re:microSD cards (5, Informative)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388247)

No, they leveraged the "Secure" part of "Secure Digital" cards and had issues with some cards that weren't fully compliant since no one else really implemented the secure half. They need it for DRM, after all, and have probably come up with a workaround for it.

Yawn (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388121)

Microsoft sure does like to announce stuff that won't be out for another six months. And boy, they sure do pay a lot of bloggers to write about all the things they imagine the Microsoft stuff might possibly do (but probably wont). But that's OK; I really do enjoy the marketing material that Microsoft put together. For example, I loved the video that Microsoft sent to every TV station in the whole country with the the woman who said that she was going to hold off on buying an iPad now and wait for the Microsoft tablet. That was a hoot.

But I have a question for SpryGuy and the rest of the not-at-all-paid-for-microsoft-shills: How long before Microsoft pays IFC to publish another industry report that says that Microsoft Phone will grow to be the number one operating system for mobile devices in just four years? I'm guessing that a new report is due pretty soon now; the last one must be almost a year old by now, and it's laughably obvious to even casual observers that Microsoft won't achieve market dominance by 2015. They need to hurry up and publish a new report that predicts the year of Microsoft domination is going to be 2016. I really, really love reading those reporters; they're so hilarious.

Re:Yawn (1)

alen (225700) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388349)

this is like the 90's

you're supposed to sit for months or years waiting on their "announced" product to ship and not buy what ever is on the market NOW. because everyone knows the MS thing will be so awesome it will be worth the wait

and you know how the genius geeks love to wait while the dumb normal folk just buy whatever is in the store NOW

Re:Yawn (1)

Un pobre guey (593801) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388405)

If their PC cash cows didn't give them so much money to subsidize their other often dubious product lines, there would very likely be no Windows phone of any kind. Seriously, would you care? Would anyone other than pundits even notice?

64 cores... (5, Funny)

Junta (36770) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388129)

64 cores should be enough for anyone!

Re:64 cores... (1)

Un pobre guey (593801) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388357)

There won't be enough battery for anyone, though.

Phone owners screwed then? (2)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388193)

Is it going to be like the days of Windows Mobile? the only way to get updates is to buy a new phone?

This is where Apple is winning, all phones get OS updates for several years. Google falls down on this as they let phone makers screw the users.

Microsoft had better offer a instant free upgrade to WP8 for all owners of the Nokia WP7 phones, or they might as well pack it in. Their "Screw the user, unless they have a credit card" attitude back with the Windows Mobile phones are what drove me to Apple in the first place.

Re:Phone owners screwed then? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40388453)

I'm an iPhone 4 owner, and I'm pissed. Here's their current feature update list for iOS 6:
http://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2012/06/ios6-feature-chart.png

I know, all their phones get the actual OS update, so they get stability and security patches, but only the newest phone will get any of the new map features (including turn-by-turn, which, imo, should have been included out of the box). I understand having to move on, but there's no reason why they shouldn't have allowed the new maps app on the iPhone 4, at a minimum.

Re:Phone owners screwed then? (3, Insightful)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388475)

This is where Apple is winning, all phones get OS updates for several years.

Except while they call it iOS 6 or iOS 5 on all devices, each device has only access to a subset of features. Microsoft is doing the same thing but calling one Windows Phone 7.8 and the other Windows Phone 8.

Metro compatible? (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388311)

I know Windows Phone 8 shares the same exact kernel as Windows RT/Win 8 and only the services that start are different. I am curious if I can write a METRO app for Windows 8 on my laptop, will it run on a Win 8 phone?

Yawn... (1)

jones_supa (887896) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388461)

The new version of their mobile operating system will bring support for processors with up to 64 cores, as well as resolutions higher than 800x480 — up to 1280x768. It will also include better support for NFC and microSD cards.

Those are the highlights? "Improvements" as small as that wouldn't justify much more than a version 7.1. Even a small update to the Linux kernel has more meat in the changelog.

Upgrade program (1)

lilfields (961485) | more than 2 years ago | (#40388515)

Microsoft needs to put water on the backlash for WP7 users that will be left with legacy devices, perhaps and upgrade program of some kind. The problem of course...is that carriers probably won't like this idea.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?