Windows Phone 8 Officially Unveiled

64 cores by 0123456 · 2012-06-20 06:04 · Score: 5, Funny

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

Re:64 cores by kthreadd · 2012-06-20 06:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

Or just Flash.
Re:64 cores by s_p_oneil · 2012-06-20 06:50 · Score: 4, Funny

It would get way too hot for that. You could use the excess heat to generate enough electricity to power your laptop. Then you could use your laptop to warm your hands.
Re:64 cores by Quiet_Desperation · 2012-06-20 07:00 · Score: 3, Insightful

Still need more cores.
Re:64 cores by Quiet_Desperation · 2012-06-20 07:01 · Score: 5, Funny

Da fuck did I just read?
Re:64 cores by nschubach · 2012-06-20 07:03 · Score: 4, Informative

But Flash is single threaded!

--
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
Re:64 cores by afidel · 2012-06-20 07:09 · Score: 2

Yeah, my Android device does that just fine. In fact it will almost burn you (120F last week was my new alltime high, I've had both the phone and the battery replaced, so it's just the model, HTC Evo Shift-4G).

--
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Re:64 cores by Penguinisto · 2012-06-20 07:10 · Score: 4, Interesting

...up to 64 cores, certainly.
On just one core? Sorry - you get to buy a new phone.
I'm wondering how they're going to avoid the Osbourne Effect on all the existing Nokia gear out there now, especially at a time when Nokia really, really, really needs the sales.

--
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Re:64 cores by blind+biker · 2012-06-20 07:12 · Score: 3, Funny

Or just Flash.
Or vagina.

--
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Re:64 cores by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 07:15 · Score: 1

I'd just use the excess heat to drive a turbine which powers the phone. I see absolutely no laws of physics at all that would ever get in the way of this solution. None. At all. NONE.
Re:64 cores by Guspaz · 2012-06-20 07:19 · Score: 5, Insightful

It's worth noting that the Lumia 900 came out five months ago... My response to people who complain about Apple dropping iOS support for old hardware is that Android has even shorter support periods, but this takes the cake. They didn't even make it half a year before announcing they're dropping support for it...
On the one hand I wonder if Microsoft can afford to snub the few customers they have, what with WP7's tiny marketshare, but that got me thinking, maybe they see the tiny marketshare as the reason they can afford to snub the people: they don't have much to lose if they alienate existing customers if they can capture a respectable marketshare with WP8?
Re:64 cores by Niedi · 2012-06-20 07:36 · Score: 3, Interesting

It's worth noting that the Lumia 900 came out five months ago...

5 months ago? Vodafone Germany will START to sell them "in a couple of weeks". I'm sure it will be really popular here...
Re:64 cores by NatasRevol · 2012-06-20 07:46 · Score: 2

Pretty sure the Lumia 900 was introduced 3 months ago in the US.

--
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Re:64 cores by bondsbw · 2012-06-20 09:53 · Score: 2

To be fair, Microsoft isn't completely snubbing the Lumia 900. They announced Windows Phone 7.8, bringing the compatible features like the updates to the Start screen to the older hardware.
You may say that this isn't good enough, but Apple did the same thing by not bringing Siri to the iPad 2 which was only a few months old. Nor did they bring it to the iPhone 4, which was around a year old and still under 2 year contract. They technically could have ported it (given that homebrew ports exist).
Anyway, Apple just decided to call both operating systems "iOS 5.0", even though they are essentially different and contain different voice control subsystems. What if Apple called the iPad and iPhone 3GS/4 version "iOS 4.8"?

--
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
Re:64 cores by ninjacut · 2012-06-20 10:05 · Score: 1

Android is better for that, in terms of power guzzling
Re:64 cores by Luckyo · 2012-06-20 10:09 · Score: 2

I had a flash application that made my old nokia 5800 phone vibrate in various intervals. And phone was small enough to fit inside a condom with some stretching.
You won't see something like that on your new hip iphone! :D
Re:64 cores by ninjacut · 2012-06-20 10:10 · Score: 2

Not exactly, Lumia 900 will get updated to Windows 7.8 with some of the key Windows 8 features. What is missing is mostly hardware dependant, like NFC, etc. And you are missing one key difference, they have catch up with Android and iOS so the changes are big in short time. Windows Phone 8 now is equal and actually better than iOS and Android in features and execution.
Re:64 cores by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 10:11 · Score: 1

+5 funny? Really?? I am making a vow to down-mod every single fucking "or vagina" post I come across. It's getting really old. Seriously.
Re:64 cores by Luckyo · 2012-06-20 10:12 · Score: 1

They're not dropping it. Announcement says that most of the w8 features will be ported over to "WP 7.8 update".
Problem is, it seems that wp7 had some extremely tight hardware requirements, such as built in flash memory card, so making many of the wp8 changes would make it unportable to older phones due to hardware issues.
I guess it's all up to how well the "wp7.8" patch will be done.
Re:64 cores by hlavac · 2012-06-20 10:20 · Score: 1, Insightful

There are no Microsoft fans, just bribed "influencers".
Re:64 cores by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 10:41 · Score: 2, Informative

The iPad2 and the iPhone 4 don't have the noise cancellation hardware that the iPad 3 and the 4S have. Although you can get it to run, it lacks the accuracy of the newer models, so it wasn't included. Although I'm sure other phone vendors would probably throw it in anyway with a "Your mileage may vary", Apple chose not to because the results weren't good enough.
A few different test results can be found on Google showing the loss of accuracy, especially in a noisy environment where Siri was unusable on the older hardware, but still usable on the newer.
Re:64 cores by mweather · 2012-06-20 10:45 · Score: 1

I had a flash application that made my old nokia 5800 phone vibrate in various intervals. And phone was small enough to fit inside a condom with some stretching.
You won't see something like that on your new hip iphone! :D
There's an app for that. Several, actually.
Re:64 cores by Luckyo · 2012-06-20 11:10 · Score: 1

The reference is that this is a flash application that existed for ages. Original flash was for early symbian, probably seven or eight years old.
And that a phone actually fits into a condom. For uses "not appropriate for apple device" (TM certain dead person).
Re:64 cores by Keen+Anthony · 2012-06-20 11:25 · Score: 1

I've been paying attention to the WP7 crowd closely the last few months in expectation of jumping ship from both Android and iPhone. The people who have stuck with WP7 really love the system so much more than Android or iPhone, so they don't really want to go back. The big complaints are about not having parity in popular apps that are cross platform on Android and iPhone, things like Instamatic, Skype, just about anything Zynga. If WP8 helps bring those apps over, Windows Phone users will be happy. Hopefully Microsoft is working behind the scenes to get these apps.
Re:64 cores by DAldredge · 2012-06-20 11:31 · Score: 3, Funny

I like Microsoft where do I sign up to get my bribes?
Re:64 cores by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-06-20 11:44 · Score: 1

Not exactly, Lumia 900 will get updated to Windows 7.8 with some of the key Windows 8 features. What is missing is mostly hardware dependant, like NFC, etc.
What's also missing is all the new stuff for developers, like native code. The kind of stuff that, you know, lets you actually write Skype that works in background.
Re:64 cores by stewbacca · 2012-06-20 11:45 · Score: 1

Old like your vagina?
Re:64 cores by jimmyfrank · 2012-06-20 12:08 · Score: 1

They're dropping support for the 900? I didn't hear that, maybe I'm wrong. 7.8 will help and it's even possible, with Nokia anyway, that win8 could run on the 900, that isn't out of the question yet.
Re:64 cores by im_thatoneguy · 2012-06-20 14:42 · Score: 2, Insightful

They didn't "Drop Support" they'll update it to 7.8. It just won't get features like NFC... which wouldn't do any good since it has no NFC chip in it anyway.
What good does updating the kernel of the Lumia 900 to support 64 cores or 720p screens do for the Lumia? No software update will add those features.
Re:64 cores by GPLHost-Thomas · 2012-06-20 17:00 · Score: 1

Yeah! And it comes with a tic-tac-toe game as main OS screen, so you'll have fun! :)
Re:64 cores by terjeber · 2012-06-20 18:02 · Score: 1

I make that in less than 30 minutes of working.
Liar. It would take you at least two hours to make that, and then you'd have to pay rent to your mother, and pay for the child you produced last year with your sister who is also your cousin.
Re:64 cores by Guspaz · 2012-06-20 18:46 · Score: 1

If it is the case (that WP 7.8 will get most of the features), then they couldn't have done a worse job marketing that release. Apple's approach of bundling it all together in one release and supporting which features they can on different devices would work much better. If WP8 supports NFC, for example, but the only feature on a certain phone that won't get WP8 can't do is NFC, then it markets itself a lot better to say that phone IS getting WP8 (but has no NFC) than to say it's getting a minor revision update...
Whatever anybody might say about Apple's products, they're really good at marketing: Microsoft could learn a lot from them in that regard.
Re:64 cores by Transfinite · 2012-06-21 01:21 · Score: 1

Or just a floppy drive, or a dial up modem or, or.... blah blah blah For fucks sakes FLASH is a dying format. What's wring with people.

Why such a low maximum resolution? by h4rr4r · 2012-06-20 06:07 · Score: 5, Insightful

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? by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-06-20 06:12 · Score: 4, Informative

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? by h4rr4r · 2012-06-20 06:13 · Score: 4, Insightful

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? by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-06-20 06:19 · Score: 5, Informative

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? by MrHanky · 2012-06-20 06:20 · Score: 2

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? by Samantha+Wright · 2012-06-20 06:20 · Score: 4, Insightful

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!

--
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by h4rr4r · 2012-06-20 06:21 · Score: 5, Insightful

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? by iamhassi · 2012-06-20 06:22 · Score: 5, Informative

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 runs 2012 iOS 5.1.1, 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. Wow, say what you want about Apple, but sometimes they just get it.

--
my karma will be here long after I'm gone
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by h4rr4r · 2012-06-20 06:22 · Score: 4, Insightful

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? by h4rr4r · 2012-06-20 06:26 · Score: 4, Informative

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? by h4rr4r · 2012-06-20 06:28 · Score: 1

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? by Lunix+Nutcase · 2012-06-20 06:30 · Score: 1

Yeah, because ponting out facts is now apparently "trolling". *rolls eyes*
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 06:31 · Score: 2, Insightful

My Calculator tells me that this amounts to > 300 ppi until you get to sizes over 4.9 inch, what more do you want?
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by shadowrat · 2012-06-20 06:32 · Score: 1

maybe so you could drive a larger display like a projector or tv?
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by LittleLebowskiUrbanA · 2012-06-20 06:34 · Score: 1, Informative

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.

--
This guy is way out there
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by LtGordon · 2012-06-20 06:34 · Score: 1

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? by rtfa-troll · 2012-06-20 06:34 · Score: 5, Interesting

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.

--
=~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by INeededALogin · 2012-06-20 06:36 · Score: 2

1280 x 768 isn't common.
Computer Monitors

Looks pretty popular to me. The lesson... Microsoft typically does its homework when copying.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by h4rr4r · 2012-06-20 06:40 · Score: 1

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? by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-06-20 06:44 · Score: 2

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 to enable scaling and flexible UI layouts.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 06:45 · Score: 2, Insightful

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? by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-06-20 06:45 · Score: 4, Informative

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:Why such a low maximum resolution? by h4rr4r · 2012-06-20 06:50 · Score: 1

Maybe a 5.2" phone. Check out the Galaxy Note.
Also I might want to hook it up to my tv via HDMI. My tv is a higher resolution.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by UnknowingFool · 2012-06-20 07:00 · Score: 1

For legacy apps. WP7 apps are at that resolution. Apple had the same issue with Retina displays except they were 2x for the width and height for 4x more pixels. Now the OS can be designed to scale to all sorts of resolutions like Android and WinMo. That is less efficient in terms of processing than fixed. It made sense for Android and WinMo as they had many more variations. WP7 and iPhones only have a fewer variations.

--
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by Dcnjoe60 · 2012-06-20 07:04 · Score: 1

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.
Maybe so as not to cut into sales of their new tablet?
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by Dcnjoe60 · 2012-06-20 07:05 · Score: 1, Interesting

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.
Tell that to my phone, I am constantly getting message about being out of storage space. Storage is only cheap if you can expand it.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by Dan+East · 2012-06-20 07:07 · Score: 4, Insightful

Further, pixel perfect positioning is less important with higher DPI. On a low res device, like 240x320, it made a big difference because you could see individual pixels so easily. Nowadays if things are fudged by a pixel or few then it's not visually apparent.
This reminds me of when everything was so lo-res it took a great deal of talent to create a 16x16 icon with a 16 color palette to portray some meaning. Every single pixel mattered, and you couldn't just take a large image and scale it down - you had to manipulate pixels individually, sometimes in non-obvious ways, to get the intended visual result. Now with 128x128 and higher resolution icons you can create them vector and just render them to whatever resolution is needed, or scale a massive image down to size, and it looks perfectly fine.

--
Better known as 318230.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by n30na · 2012-06-20 07:19 · Score: 1

As a designer, i recognize the importance of being pixel perfect (it can matter quite a bit in the flow of something), however, most of it just depends on avoiding aliasing and keeping certain things consistent. It is completely possible with some simple rendering/rounding rules and the like to make a vector interface that knows how to stay pixel-perfect in most use cases. People are just too lazy to implement it.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by MrHanky · 2012-06-20 07:25 · Score: 1

Well, you're not going to get 1080p resolution on a 5" device the next couple of years, so WP8 will be fine with 1280x720.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by sexconker · 2012-06-20 07:33 · Score: 1

Well, you're not going to get 1080p resolution on a 5" device the next couple of years, so WP8 will be fine with 1280x720.
Why the hell not?
I'd pay a premium for a 1920x1080 phone.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by MrHanky · 2012-06-20 07:33 · Score: 4, Insightful

64 cores is supported because it uses the NT kernel. Once you pass 300 PPI, however, there isn't all that much value in adding more pixels for a screen that's at best used to show photos and film. Perhaps if you use your phone for CAD or medical imaging or something, but you don't and you won't, ever. It's just not something anyone should care about.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 07:40 · Score: 1

enjoy not using half of the features introduced version of version.. just because the version number changes on your phone doesn't mean you are actually able to use the new features on the old device....
is that really so hard to understand? even for the retarded Slashdot crowd?
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by NatasRevol · 2012-06-20 07:49 · Score: 1

But your feature phone calendar didn't sync. Couldn't be shared to your wife's phone. Couldn't be updated on a web page. Couldn't be updated on a desktop app. And have all those updates to all those devices within a minute.

--
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by NatasRevol · 2012-06-20 07:53 · Score: 1

I thought they released a slim laptop yesterday?

--
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by melted · 2012-06-20 07:58 · Score: 1

>> I regularly laugh at ones who attempt to do such things with webpages
That's why native apps are not webpages. Webpages suck ass.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2012-06-20 08:03 · Score: 1

What really frosts me about this is a few years ago, back when Vista was still "Longhorn", Microsoft was talking about how great their new GPU accelerated desktop was going to be. I remember reading about how Microsoft was working with an LCD manufacturer (Viewsonic...? I'm sorry I don't remember.) to make a display over 5,000 pixels wide and that Windows was going to properly support that. I even remember commenting on Slashdot about how cool that'd be. But... it never happened. Lame.

--

"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by Mabhatter · 2012-06-20 08:07 · Score: 1

But other than apps specifically for front facing cameras I have not run into more than one or two apps on the App Store that don't work just fine on my 3GS. THAT is what I care about, not being FORCED to get a new phone just to be sure Angry Birds doesn't stop supporting my version. I don't expect new features tied to hardware (ok, sometimes that's questionable) but I'm not being LEFT OUT from buying new regular apps.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by jader3rd · 2012-06-20 08:12 · Score: 1

I don't like the idea of having to throw out my phone with all my contacts and info
But with Windows Phones, the phone isn't the primary source of data (except for game save points). All of your contacts, music, etc, comes from a different source and is only sync'd with the phone. Even game save data, there's api's that'll allow game devs to store the information off of the phone, but it's a rarely used feature. So nothing is really lost when buying a new device.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by h4rr4r · 2012-06-20 08:21 · Score: 1

I bet we do see it in the next 2 years.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by h4rr4r · 2012-06-20 08:23 · Score: 1

I have 32GB of storage, what device do you have?
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by citizenr · 2012-06-20 08:23 · Score: 3, Informative

Well, you're not going to get 1080p resolution on a 5" device the next couple of years, so WP8 will be fine with 1280x720.
oh RLY?
http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/5-inch-lg-display-packs-440ppi-1080p-resolution-20120528/

--
Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by Lennie · 2012-06-20 08:27 · Score: 1

Why would you want 64 cores on your phone ?
It is the same question.

--
New things are always on the horizon
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by Kjella · 2012-06-20 08:41 · Score: 2

Well not quite, sometimes you have to cheat a little because a simple scale blur things so you want to tweak it a little even if it's a little bit distorted compared to the full size image. I haven't tried it on a 4K screen but at least on a FullHD screen that was still true, the original "icon" was huge like 400x400 or whatever but it still took some pixel tweaking to make it look decent at 16x16, 22x22, 32x32 which I think was the sizes in use at the time. That's why most icon formats allow you to specify a bunch of resolution specific pixmaps and only scale it for other sizes.

--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by Haxagon · 2012-06-20 08:52 · Score: 1

Looks like they've got 720p, too.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by gl4ss · 2012-06-20 08:59 · Score: 1

of course you have to do some alignment tweaking if your end result is 32x32 pixels, no matter what the original is - every pixel is still just 1/32 of the width of the icon. that was the point.
but if your target icon is 128x128, it matters less, and you're unlikely to use lines on it which are smaller than 1 pixel.
set screen sizes for wp8 are idiotic -now, set aspect ratios, that I could understand being there to make things easier-, there's going to be another big switch in 2 years to wp9 with resolution independence.
and some mobile os's have been using (tiny)svg's now for icons for years now - burning platform or not...

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by gl4ss · 2012-06-20 09:01 · Score: 2

http://www.google.com/search?q=lg+5%22+fullhd&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
lg has already demoed such screen.

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by Samantha+Wright · 2012-06-20 09:06 · Score: 3, Informative

A lot of things from Longhorn never happened—most notably WinFS, Microsoft's fabled tag-centric filesystem. It's too bad they couldn't keep their act together when the market was eager.

--
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by downhole · 2012-06-20 09:15 · Score: 1

Respect to Apple for doing well with backward-compatibility and all, but seriously, contacts and info are your complaints? I don't know what WinPhone and iOS do, but my Androids back up all of my contact info to the cloud, and it all gets synced to any phone or tablet I use a few minutes after I log into my Google account on it. And pretty much all phones from companies other than Apple have charged with MicroUSB for years.

--
I don't reply to ACs
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by PCM2 · 2012-06-20 09:18 · Score: 2

Looks pretty popular to me.
Errr... are you sure you're reading that right? By that table, less than 2% of Web users and a negligible percentage of Steam users have 1280x768 monitors. By comparison, 1280x800 commands 13% of the Web and 4% of Steam, and 1366x768 is around 18% across the board.

--
Breakfast served all day!
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by Johann+Lau · 2012-06-20 09:24 · Score: 1

Those designers can fuck off. It keeps so much in the stone age.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by MHolmesIV · 2012-06-20 09:30 · Score: 1

Phone screen resolution =/= HDMI output resolution. There's nothing stopping the phone from playing movies and such at 1080p over HDMI.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by h4rr4r · 2012-06-20 09:36 · Score: 1

There is a lot of stuff you can do over HDMI that is not playing movies. Most mobile browsers also make for a decent ten foot interface.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by sexconker · 2012-06-20 10:23 · Score: 1

No, you see, MrHanky said the technology isn't there yet. It won't be there until Apple invents it and calls it Retina+.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by das_io · 2012-06-20 10:24 · Score: 1

A professional icon designer will design his icon vector based, raster the sizes he needs and tweak the pixel images until they look great. Pure SVG will just be not as "crisp" in comparison. Just look at the different folder images for comparison.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-06-20 11:53 · Score: 1

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!

You have some strange history book on the history of Microsoft developer platforms. In Win95 timeframe, support for vector graphics in the UI was practically non-existent - GDI, the core graphics API, was decidedly raster-centric (it measured things in device pixels!) and worked in immediate mode (render every frame, rather than define primitives and let them render itself). Higher-level UI framework, by which I mean stuff like CreateWindow, also operated in device pixels mode, with the notable (and strange) exception of CreateDialog, which used resolution-independent "dialog units" in the dialog template.
It did provide apps the ability to be DPI-independent by exposing the APIs necessary to convert between device pixels and dialog units (or points), but you had to use those yourself. Most Microsoft apps did that, but most third party developers didn't bother, and many third-party frameworks layered on top of Win32 had also ignored it (Delphi/VCL was a notable offender).
VB6 had kinda sorta DPI-independent UI framework by measuring all widget sizes and such in twips (0.05 pt) and providing vector primitives. But there were still a lot of ways to screw things up, and so people did.
It wasn't until WPF that a UI framework designed by Microsoft actually had the notion of resolution independence baked into it. And that carries on into Silverlight, Windows Phone, and now also Windows 8 Metro.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-06-20 11:53 · Score: 1

On a device like Note you'd probably want the full Win8 anyway.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by Samantha+Wright · 2012-06-20 12:51 · Score: 1

Well, yeah—that's how it goes with any underutilized feature. But it was still there. Windows was happy to draw UI widgets at any size; checkboxes and close buttons were/are still defined by a font (Marlett.ttf). It would've been relatively painless to dust off the GDI ecosystem and force everyone to develop in a resolution-independent manner if sufficient devices came about to create demand.

--
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by k(wi)r(kipedia) · 2012-06-20 13:25 · Score: 1

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).

Tell that to the Blackberry crowd. iDevices are notorious for not even attempting to cater to every user case scenario (single-button mouse, no keyboard, hard to disassemble, etc). Apple as a fashion item is comparable to high heels and sports cars. They're not for everybody. (I know, it's possible to extend iDevices to cater to the Blackberry crowd, but that's a whole different banana.)
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by ChunderDownunder · 2012-06-20 13:49 · Score: 1

these guys are crazy about things being pixel perfect, which can be hard to achieve with vector graphics
Yes, they're crazy all right. Vector graphics are designed to scale. Pixels are so last century.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by Nursie · 2012-06-20 15:10 · Score: 2

Don't knock it 'til you've tried it, I love my note.
It must be said that I don't actually talk on the phone very often though, it's more of a messaging device and games machine.
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by olahaye74 · 2012-06-21 02:43 · Score: 1

+1000
My iPhone 3GS 32GB from June 2009 will receive iOS6. Of course with less features, BUT with latest API, thus with the ability to install latest Apps.
Since I bought my iPhone in June 2009, I got the following enhancements:
- video/photo and text copy/past (with ability to copy past sub sections of a video)
- iMessages so I can target WifI only idevices
- Multitasking
- directorys/groups of applications
- iCloud (realy great)
- EAP-SIM for WiFi authentication
- AirPlay (audio and video, but no mirror)
- New apps (Kiosk, Game Center, ...)
I was left out with the following enhancements:
- Video editor (only 256MB RAM is insufficient. even when jailbreaking and installing the app, it crash with out of memory): hardware limitation
- FaceTime (no front camera (hardware limitation))
- Siri (marketing limitation?): not extremely usefull for now (can't command my GPS software to enter destination, so pointyless).
- tabbed browsing: app exists for that
- Wifi internet connection sharing (only bluettooth sharing and cable sharing): still works fine with my ipad using blutooth.
- AirPlay mirror (hardware limitation)
- iOS6: no GPS turn by turn navigation: (already have CoPilot Live)
- iOS6: no 3D maps (hardware limitation; it's already slow on the new iPad).
=> Now lets compare to Windows Phones:
You buy a WP7 phone last year (or today) and you can't have proper multitasking: it prevents receiving skype calls when skype is not running in the foreground.
WP8 is out: (I don't know if it solves the problem), but one thing is sure: your phone is obsolete and won't get update AT ALL. I mean, no apps designed for WP7 will run on your less than a year old device! What a shame.
=> Now lets compare to Androïd phones as well: updates varies depending on the manufacturer, but one thing is sure: updates never occur on a more than one year old phone (or very rare). Even worse, you still have phones that get released todays (more than 9 months since ICS is out) with 2.3 installed and no planed updates: example: Motorola Defy variants. This means that you're stuck with API level 10 while other are already running API level 16 (with Open GL 2D which appeared in API level 14). Thus games using this API won't run on the device you've just bought. The problem is that many customers won't know that when buying a device (not everybody is a geek or developer) and this will make people angry...
IMHO, the big issue here is that if manufacturer want to really compete with Apple, the only thing to concentrate about NOW is maintenance! They need to maintain a device more than a year for the following reasons:
- 1/ If you purchased an app like CopilotLive, the latest version requires a recent OS: you can't get it even if your phone is less than 2 years old!
- 2/ There are security issues that don't get fixed. having a device that is not fixed just one year after purchase is a shame.
- 3/ It's a nightmare for developers: they need to stuck to old API to target more audience: => more work, less functionality, less efficient (manual 2D scrolling instead of OpenGL 2D scrolling as an example).
Common excuse is that there are too much hardware to maintain all the flavors. Bullshit: cyanogen mod is able to do that for all brands versus one brand can't do it for its devices??? It's marketting to for people to renew their device.
Why so much device gets out each year. Right now, Motorola is selling (in France) 10 different Androïd smartphones! Samsung (also in France) is Selling no more than 19 Galaxy variants (not counting the 2 SGII variants i9100 and i9100g) and not counting the 2 variants of the SG-SIII (4cores 3G in EU and 2cores 4G in US).... That's insane! What the hell do they want to achieve? Flooding the market with many models to artificially boost the market?
Really, they need to look at the whole picture and understand why Apple is doing fine with only 3 phones and 2 tablets. that would increase competitivity and help price to drop (especially Apple prices which are insane). Instead of that Samsung is going on the "high end" market by raising it's prices....Not sure it's the way to go IMHO...
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by olahaye74 · 2012-06-21 02:48 · Score: 1

+1000.
I'll keep my 3GS until upport is dropped by Apple. I was prepared to buy next iPhone, but it looks like iOS6 will run on my 3GS, so I'll wait a bit more before upgrading....
Compared to my Brother in law who bought a Samsung Galxy (left with Android 1.6), then a Galaxy S (left with Android 2.?), then a Galaxy SII (waiting ICS from he's operator) and soon a SIII as it's operator has still havent provided ICS for his SII). All those purchase in order to be able to buy new regular apps....What a shame!
Re:Why such a low maximum resolution? by Bedouin+X · 2012-06-21 07:27 · Score: 1

I think you may be overstating things a bit without knowing exactly what the WP 7.8 update will contain.
For apps that aren't 3D games, VOIP, or begging for voice integration - a number I would assume to be the overwhelming majority - the new APIs won't probably won't matter too much and I think it's safe to assume most developers - early on at least - would just target 7.5 since those apps would have the broadest potential customer base and work fine on both versions.
Also, I don't think any level of competition will cause Apple to lower pricing for its leading devices. They are a boutique brand with tons of lock-in. If you want a break it's going to come in the form of discounting old hardware (e.g. keeping the iPhone 4 and 2nd-Gen iPad on the market). Samsung is the only other company outside of Apple making money selling smartphone so I have a good idea of how they might answer the question of whether their high end push is the right way.

--
Dissolve... Resolve... Evolve...

Won't work on current phones? by cpu6502 · 2012-06-20 06:08 · Score: 5, Insightful

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."

--
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"

Re:Won't work on current phones? by h4rr4r · 2012-06-20 06:10 · Score: 1

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? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 06:13 · Score: 2, Interesting

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? by Joce640k · 2012-06-20 06:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

Microsoft's interests don't include keeping Nokia shares high.
Quite the opposite in fact, if they really are planning to buy them.

--
No sig today...
Re:Won't work on current phones? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 06:17 · Score: 1

Not that anyone here reads the articles, but it was explained in an adjacent article. 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? by Haxagon · 2012-06-20 06:21 · Score: 1

The single-core stuff will still get Windows Phone 7.8
Re:Won't work on current phones? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 06:24 · Score: 2, Interesting

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.
Re:Won't work on current phones? by lilfields · 2012-06-20 06:36 · Score: 1

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? by Cinder6 · 2012-06-20 07:09 · Score: 4, Insightful

The difference between Apple dropping PPC support and Microsoft dropping Lumia 900 support is that Apple made the announcement 3 years in advance.

--
If you can't convince them, convict them.
Re:Won't work on current phones? by garry_g · 2012-06-20 07:22 · Score: 1

Best way to drive down the price for Nokia and take them over ... after all, they went all in on the WinPhone crap ... buyers that already picked up the phone from them will be p@ssed, and people interested won't buy them ...
Re:Won't work on current phones? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 07:34 · Score: 2, Interesting

You can buy a new phone even if you're on contract, so ... what the hell are you smoking?
Oh, yeah, that's just fucking great. I just bought a brand new Lumia 900 that was marketed to hell and back as the second coming and now you are telling me it is obsolete before I even get the wrapper off and I should just buy something else?

MS is giving the equivalent of WP8 in WP7.8 (hence the naming)
And Windows Phone 8 apps won't be backward compatible to it. Pure slap in the face to those of us that actually believed the bs about the "beta test being over". Fucking bullshit. I guaran-goddamn-tee you that my next phone will be a Google Nexus device. Fuck Microsoft and the Nokia they rode in on.
Re:Won't work on current phones? by cpu6502 · 2012-06-20 07:59 · Score: 5, Informative

>>>It worked very well for desktop Windows - Microsoft writes the minimum requirements in order to force hardware manufacturers/OEMs to actually make powerful devices,
And this is what we call "spin". Also known as "false". With every WinOS released (except 7) Microsoft wrote the requirements to make it EASY for manufacturers to qualify with older hardware. Like when they claimed XP could run on 64 meg (but it ran like a snail). Or that Vista could run on 512 meg, but instead made my brother's new P4 PC randomly freeze for 2-3 minutes (while vista thrashed the HD swapfile). Microsoft has always *under* specced their OSes to try and boost sales for older computers that barely run the poorly-coded memory hog.
Vice-versa Apple sells hardware, so they tend to over spec their OS requirements, in order to make older machines obsolete and force an upgrade if you want the new OS (or the latest Safari or latest iTunes). Example: When I tried to upgrade to 10.4 and discovered my 400 MHz Mac was blocked by Apple ("does not meet minimum specs"). I found an online hack to override Apple's block (an illegal act under DMCA) and discovered 10.4 worked just fine on my machine. Apple was just trying to force me and others to buy new machines.

--
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Re:Won't work on current phones? by gutnor · 2012-06-20 08:29 · Score: 1, Interesting

The value of nokia is the brand name and its know-how. The engineer wont stay on a sinking ship and the one that do will get fired a few at a times each time nokia sinks a bit deeper.
Once the shares hits rock bottom, what exactly will MS buy ? A bunch of middle-manager remembering the good old times when they had the technical resource to build phone, or a brand that is only remembered in declining markets like feature phones ?
That being said, what is Nokia thinking ? They have basically written off all their current line up of phones, they are basically back to the same position they were 1 year ago, with phone running only dead system. I personally bought a Lumia 710 because as it could work as a GPS (downloadable map for free) and was very cheap. I actually thought that they had something with Windows phone, and was expecting WP8.
I can imagine how many updates the Nokia apps will receive in the following months ... that is a big fuck you like not even Apple would dare.
Re:Won't work on current phones? by UnknowingFool · 2012-06-20 08:32 · Score: 1

I would ask what are you smoking. People who already have WP7 on contract are stuck on them unless they pay to get out of their contracts WP7.8 is not Win 8. Leopard (10.5.x) worked on PPC. Older customers still got updates to to Tiger (10.4.x) until Snow Leopard came out 4 years after Apple announced Intel transition. To be comparable, Apple would have launched Snow Leopard then tell their customers their that their PPC machines were incompatible.

--
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Re:Won't work on current phones? by marcosdumay · 2012-06-20 08:46 · Score: 1

However, the fact that the Lumia 900..... won't be able to update will undoubtedly leave some owners of these devices feeling hung out.....
That's bad. I recomend that all two of them go to Balmer's room and complain. Maybe next time MS will buy some upgreadable phones for them.

--
Rethinking email
Re:Won't work on current phones? by gl4ss · 2012-06-20 09:04 · Score: 1

but apparently the native apps will not be there for wp7.x.
and why there's no update, it's apparently something to do with not being able to run the new kernel in wp8.
however, I've yet to have read a good reason except they cut ties to some driver coders or some shit like that.

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:Won't work on current phones? by Haxagon · 2012-06-20 09:55 · Score: 2

Only native code won't be compatible.
Re:Won't work on current phones? by ChunderDownunder · 2012-06-20 14:03 · Score: 1

A friend, and Nokia fan, bought a Symbian (Nokia Belle) phone after Elop's Windows announcement. The reason being that it was a mature platform and he didn't want to be an earlier adopter - however shiny and modern the Lumia seemed.
He might have been right - His phone might receive software updates (through Accenture) after WP7 is EOLed...
Re:Won't work on current phones? by hmmm · 2012-06-20 23:12 · Score: 1

MS have just completely screwed over Nokia. Very few people are going to buy a new Nokia now until WP8 appears, so Nokia have no business for the next 6 months. I'm not sure they can survive that long with no income.

What a lame announcement... by Foxman98 · 2012-06-20 06:12 · Score: 5, Insightful

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.

--
S.t.e.v.e.

Re:What a lame announcement... by Joce640k · 2012-06-20 06:19 · Score: 1, Interesting

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...

--
No sig today...
Re:What a lame announcement... by Haxagon · 2012-06-20 06:19 · Score: 5, Informative

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... by Foxman98 · 2012-06-20 06:23 · Score: 2

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"

--
S.t.e.v.e.
Re:What a lame announcement... by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-06-20 06:24 · Score: 2

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... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 06:28 · Score: 1

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... by x0d · 2012-06-20 06:34 · Score: 1

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... by lilfields · 2012-06-20 06:39 · Score: 1

"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... by Missing.Matter · 2012-06-20 06:42 · Score: 1

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.
Re:What a lame announcement... by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-06-20 06:47 · Score: 1

Not necessarily something new, just something that major competitors don't have - which is what I've listed.
Skype integration is likely going to be a major selling point. Offline maps have a smaller audience, but when you need them you need them - and NAVTEQ maps are actually very good from what I've seen of them.
Whether that will be enough is another matter. The other obvious selling point is integration with Win8 tablets, but, of course, those also face an uphill struggle...
Re:What a lame announcement... by lister+king+of+smeg · 2012-06-20 06:55 · Score: 1, Troll

i have seen two windows phones in the wild, one of them the owner was wearing toe shoes and i was near Redmond need i say more.

--
---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
Re:What a lame announcement... by h4rr4r · 2012-06-20 06:58 · Score: 1

Can they yet accept skype calls without the skype app open?
Every time I want to skype with my brother who has a WP7 phone I have to send him a text message first.
Re:What a lame announcement... by jimicus · 2012-06-20 07:00 · Score: 5, Insightful

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why the iPhone is selling as quick as they can build them and Nokia's Windows phones... aren't. Apple introduce a feature and immediately figure out a way to tell the world how that feature is useful; Microsoft introduce a feature so they can tick a box.
Re:What a lame announcement... by Bert64 · 2012-06-20 07:03 · Score: 1

Skype integration will make the devices unpopular with mobile carriers... And unpopular with consumers if they ever realise they've traded the relatively competitive mobile carriers for a 60s style monopoly telco.
There are a bunch of free offline mapping tools for other phones, and several paid ones too, not to mention the included online mapping tool

--
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Re:What a lame announcement... by im_thatoneguy · 2012-06-20 07:08 · Score: 3, Insightful

They already did that. It's called WP7. It's full of features that nobody else has. This is a case of adding all the ones that everyone else had too.
Re:What a lame announcement... by chromeronin · 2012-06-20 07:10 · Score: 1

I've only seen one windows phone in the wild that someone actually spent their own money on. All the rest have been provided by work. Our current corporate cell plan gives us a choice off one of the crappiest androids from HTC or a slightly better species winmobile. For me though I'm using my iphone4 I bought a year and a half ago. Oh, and that is still going to be supported by ios5
Re:What a lame announcement... by DogDude · 2012-06-20 07:13 · Score: 1

"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."

I've never seen anybody using an Android phone. That means that it makes no sense to buy one.

My Windows Phone, though, is great for work, though. It integrates with Exchange better than the other two options.

--
I don't respond to AC's.
Re:What a lame announcement... by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-06-20 08:02 · Score: 1

In WP8, yes. It could do that even as a third-party app there, I think, but now that it's a built-in native app, it's certainly going to work that way. AFAIK, it actually integrates with the dialer, so you get transparent Skype call handling when both sides have it enabled and have connectivity - much like how iMessage works on iOS for SMS, but for voice.
Re:What a lame announcement... by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-06-20 08:05 · Score: 1

Skype integration will make the devices unpopular with mobile carriers...

Probably so. As a user, I couldn't care less, though. A nice smack down was long overdue there; Apple has already delivered the first part of it with iMessage and Facetime, this is just the final nail in the coffin

And unpopular with consumers if they ever realise they've traded the relatively competitive mobile carriers for a 60s style monopoly telco.
How so? It's not like you can't install third party VoIP apps on a WP device, and they should work much better in WP8 thanks to native code and background execution support.

There are a bunch of free offline mapping tools for other phones, and several paid ones too, not to mention the included online mapping tool
How many of them let you preload the entire world map, or at least the entire continent (say, NA)? How many have offline navigation?
Online maps like what Google offers are awesome, when they work - i.e. when you're in data coverage area, and not roaming. But it would be nice to have a phone that can fully replace an auto GPS for long trips, and that requires offline maps & nav.
Re:What a lame announcement... by NatasRevol · 2012-06-20 08:13 · Score: 1

iOS/Android have ActiveSync from Microsoft. For integrating with Exchange - calendars, contacts, email, notes.
How does WinPhone integrate better with Exchange?

--
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Re:What a lame announcement... by _xeno_ · 2012-06-20 08:16 · Score: 3, Interesting

Apple introduce a feature and immediately figure out a way to tell the world how that feature is useful
This is something Apple really does deserve a lot of credit for. When the iPhone launched, their commercials were essentially little 30 second tutorials on how to use the fucking thing. Same with the iPhone 4S - their commercials show people using Siri, creating a little tutorial on the commands you can use with Siri and what they do. Their ads are literally little user stories and tutorials on how to use the device and how it enhances your life.
So if you hand someone an iPhone, chances are, they'll know how to use it. Not because the interface is intuitive, but because they've seen a 30 second tutorial on it 50 thousand times.
As opposed to other companies' ads, which basically boast features like "higher megapixels than iPhone" and "you can take pictures while taking a video!" (That's a desired feature? I've never wanted to do that.) And while it's still a user story, the user in the ad I'm thinking of is skydiving, whereas Apple has Zooey Whatshername in her pajamas wandering around her house using her iPhone. One's a bit easier to relate to for most people.

--
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
Re:What a lame announcement... by DogDude · 2012-06-20 08:35 · Score: 1

If you set it up this way (it's this way by default): The phone's contact list *is* the Exchange contact list (email, phone, text, etc.). The phone's calendar *is* the Exchange Calendar. The phone's to do list *is* the Exchange to-do list. And of course, email is there, too. It's all integrated together very, very well. For heavy Exchange users (I'm one), it's really nice. It's as close to a seamless integration as I can imagine. There's no active syncing or connecting or app required. If somebody schedules a meeting with me via Outlook (and they're allowed to), it automatically shows up in my phone, reminders and all. If I update a Contact in my phone, it's updated on the Exchange Server, and everybody's Outlook clients in real time.

--
I don't respond to AC's.
Re:What a lame announcement... by NatasRevol · 2012-06-20 08:40 · Score: 1

So you can't have separate contact lists? Like one for work, one for personal? Or email? Or calendars?
BTW, ActiveSync is the name, it does exactly what you describe.

--
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Re:What a lame announcement... by gutnor · 2012-06-20 08:46 · Score: 2

Mango features they unveiled were promptly implemented by Apple.
Come-on, that is a bit lame. If you have done any type of development in a large company, you would know that it takes month to do about anything, even something trivial takes month to develop, especially if you need to make sure that the new feature work well on one of the market leading device. That is even worse at Apple where there is a culture of being anally retentive on the little details and they completely ignored for years other great Android features. You will notice that all companies always seem to work on roughly the same stuff at the same time, if it get delivered soon after, that means that it was in the pipeline for a while.
What happens is that MS has few opportunities to "wow" the people, so the best strategy is to keep everything under wrap until the actual user is there to buy. If I want to be cynical (see a previous post about how I feel with my now obsolete Lumia 710), I would say that it is also better for MS not to remind too much the customer buying the current Windows phones what they will miss in a few months.
And then fuck, that is MS, promising and not delivering has been their company policy for year. Better for them to take the Apple approach: talk about the stuff when it ships.
Re:What a lame announcement... by marcosdumay · 2012-06-20 08:49 · Score: 2

OK great, 64-cores? who cares?
Somebody at MS has just discovered that Android can run dozens of thousands of cores, and they can't be left behind.

--
Rethinking email
Re:What a lame announcement... by jimicus · 2012-06-20 09:01 · Score: 2

You know what the odd thing is?
This sort of thing is Sales 101: Appeal to people's emotional side. Adding emotional value to a product sells.
Apple do this by, for instance, showing someone happily video calling a relative. Yeah, they do tell you about the technology on their website but every time they do they immediately explain in plain English why it might interest you - talking about features people actually care about.
Most technology companies are terrible at this.
Re:What a lame announcement... by DogDude · 2012-06-20 09:09 · Score: 1

You can have separate ones if you want to, but you don't have to. It's really designed for people (like me) who want the integration. Of course, you can install a bazillion "apps" that do other things, but that's not really the point of the Windows Phone, I don't think. It's pretty clear from using it that the integration is what they're focused on, and it is pretty tight.

--
I don't respond to AC's.
Re:What a lame announcement... by NatasRevol · 2012-06-20 09:14 · Score: 1

I'm pretty sure you don't know what ActiveSync does, then. It's all integrated the same as Exchange. Microsoft designed it that way.

--
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Re:What a lame announcement... by DogDude · 2012-06-20 09:25 · Score: 1

I understand what ActiveSync is. I'm talking about using the phone, not the syncing.

--
I don't respond to AC's.
Re:What a lame announcement... by downhole · 2012-06-20 09:31 · Score: 1

I hope not... I have Android, and I think it does this the right way. Exchange contacts and calendar are integrated into the built-in ones, but there's still a separate Google contact list and calendar. I see all of my Exchange contacts and events in the same lists, but my out of work contacts and events are there too, and if I create a new one, it can be either Exchange or Google (or some other account type). What I really like is how it merges contacts - if the same person is in Google and Exchange (and Facebook and whatever else), then the info from all sources is combined into one person in the contact list, and tapping on it shows all of their info from all sources, complete with ability to call, text, or email all numbers and addresses from whichever email account you want.
Exchange is supported well natively, but I use Touchdown anyways because the Exchange admins require password locks and I don't want to password lock my whole phone or try to hack my way around it. Touchdown lets me keep a simple lock on non-work stuff, but you need to enter a password to read Exchange email and events. What's nice is that even though they keep it separate, the contacts still integrate and the events summaries still show up in the agenda widget.

--
I don't reply to ACs
Re:What a lame announcement... by NatasRevol · 2012-06-20 09:38 · Score: 1

You have yet to explain how iOS/ActiveSync is any better than WP/Exchange. They integrate the same.

--
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Re:What a lame announcement... by ninjacut · 2012-06-20 09:40 · Score: 1

Till now wireless providers were busy pitcing iPhone and Android over any other platform. Nokia Lumia 900 was bit of a change. The share has doubled in this year, and expected to grow. It should reach 10% in the coming year and then be on equal footing with Android and iOS. The same reason why Linux fails on desktop applies here as well right?
Re:What a lame announcement... by muffen · 2012-06-20 10:16 · Score: 1

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.
I bought one for my wife, made perfect sense. She had an old iPhone 3Gs which wasnt working very well, she uses the phone for some browsing, listening to spotify and audio books, email, calendar and some document reading. She doesn't use that many apps.

I bought her the Lumia 800 because the second-hand value of that phone is next to nothing (paid roughly â200 for a 5 month old phone), it looks quite nice (important to her), has an amazing interface and has good batterylife... and it just works (yes, I just said that about a microsoft product).

There are plenty of reasons for getting a Windows Phone, I would personally get one if they would just port Rumble and my online banking app over to it, only two apps missing for me.
Re:What a lame announcement... by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-06-20 12:01 · Score: 1

+1, Nailed it.
Re:What a lame announcement... by stewbacca · 2012-06-20 12:12 · Score: 1

You ever notice that Apple commercials show users actually using the devices without the "simulated screen" disclaimer at the bottom? Very few companies do this, but Apple does it with every commercial. Sure, they may edit out lags and speed up connectivity, but the show the device being used like it is used in the wild. Other companies, well, they use "simulated screens" because their product sucks bad enough they are too afraid to show it to anybody.
Re:What a lame announcement... by stewbacca · 2012-06-20 12:18 · Score: 1

iOS 5 has been out for nine months now.
Re:What a lame announcement... by jimmyfrank · 2012-06-20 12:29 · Score: 1

Funny, I bought a HTC Trophy for my wife, $100 on ebay. No contract renewal, cheap, works great for what she wants. Win!
Re:What a lame announcement... by cavehobbit · 2012-06-20 14:29 · Score: 1

Fine. What about people without Exchange?
I need to sync my personal outlook with my personal phone. I need to do it without a third party involved.
Why? Because I use my personal phone for work. I do not want my corporate information filtered through someone else server, (iOS, Android), and I do not want my personal information filtered through my employers server, (Exchange, Blackberry).
My employer would not be happy if meeting notices about the back-end system I might be working on for the major new service offering were to show up on Google servers, or anywhere else. And I sure know my employer has no business knowing what I do evenings or weekends. (my employer is a very large company in a very competitive sector)
Currently, my Symbian phone, as well as old win6.5(?) phones can synch with Outlook on my PC over Bluetooth, (also cable and infrared if I prefer). No third party server needed. They both do this without any manual intervention. As soon as I walk within range, my phone connects to my laptop and syncs directly with it, without a third party server involved*. The last I checked, iOS, Android and Win7/8 require use of a third party server, and in the case of ios and android they do not sync everything in outlook.
Why would Google, Apple and Microsoft all take away existing functionality and now require that this information be sent through a third party server? I suspect the question answers itself.
*(This is using the last version of Nokia's PC Suite, as even the replacement tools OVI and Nokia Suite have removed some of the original functionality, like one way sync)
Re:What a lame announcement... by 5um0F1 · 2012-06-20 15:06 · Score: 1

I always thought the term "retina display" was a bit like "bell-end porn"
Re:What a lame announcement... by WolfgangPG · 2012-06-21 01:29 · Score: 1

WP8 announcement was for developers -- not consumers. The new consumer features outside of the new start screen will be detailed later in the year leading up to the WP8 release.
Re:What a lame announcement... by DogDude · 2012-06-21 03:03 · Score: 1

I have no idea. I don't think there's anyway to magically sync stuff on your PC to your phone without A. physically connecting the two or B. going through an intermediary.

--
I don't respond to AC's.

How to kill a nonexistant marketshare.... by JImbob0i0 · 2012-06-20 06:13 · Score: 5, Interesting

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.... by Cro+Magnon · 2012-06-20 06:37 · Score: 3, Funny

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

--
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
Re:How to kill a nonexistant marketshare.... by ulricr · 2012-06-20 07:06 · Score: 1

clever reply... to bad I don't have mod points..

Native code by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-06-20 06:14 · Score: 4, Informative

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 by daniel78 · 2012-06-20 06:26 · Score: 1

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 by Tough+Love · 2012-06-20 07:31 · Score: 1

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.
I love it, the fall of the empire is well under way.

--
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Re:Native code by Kethinov · 2012-06-20 07:37 · Score: 1

Screw native code. They're better off making IE a modern web browser so people can make WebGL games with multiplayer over web sockets. Why share just your models when you can share the entire codebase across operating systems?

--
You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
Re:Native code by daniel78 · 2012-06-20 07:42 · Score: 1

In WP8, the problem has gone from "WTF???" to merely "hugely inconvenient".
Unfortunately for MS, when you have no app developers, and no market share, "hugely inconvenient" is something you probably want to avoid.
Re:Native code by WilyCoder · 2012-06-20 07:54 · Score: 2

^^^ Jesus H Tap-dancing Christ why do I still come to this site....
Re:Native code by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-06-20 08:07 · Score: 1

They're better off making IE a modern web browser so people can make WebGL games with multiplayer over web sockets. Why share just your models when you can share the entire codebase across operating systems?
Which systems? Last I checked, mobile Safari doesn't support WebGL, either. Nor does the stock Android browser.
Re:Native code by gbjbaanb · 2012-06-20 08:22 · Score: 1

its a nice, utopian idea - a single cross-platform meta environment in which to code that has really easy GUI elements, with a really easy programming language to glue it all together with super-fast 3d vector graphics toolkit....
meanwhile, back in reality. You get the best we've got with native code, which can host an OpenGL environment if you really wanted and you get as fast a runtime as you can get. If you really want your HTML environment (which, to be fair is a good platform for some types of games) then wait for Apache Cordova to get ported. I've found that to be good for the other platforms, there's no reason why it shouldn't arrive for WinPho8.
(PS websockets... don't scale to millions of simultaneous users)
Re:Native code by baka_toroi · 2012-06-21 06:39 · Score: 1

But don't you get it?! It's semantic scalable Web 3.0 with cross-platform vertical integration what matters!

iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 by jmcbain · 2012-06-20 06:14 · Score: 1

The iPhone 3GS, 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 by Haxagon · 2012-06-20 06:18 · Score: 3, Informative

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 by lilfields · 2012-06-20 06:43 · Score: 1, Interesting

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.
Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 06:49 · Score: 3, Insightful

It will run 7.8, an update that has most (if not all) of the non-hardware-specific features. The summary is incorrect.
But the phones with 7.8 will not run windows phone 8 apps and that's what really matters. Please be intellectually honest when fanboying in the future.
Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 by DragonWriter · 2012-06-20 06:51 · Score: 3, Informative

The iPhone 3GS, 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.

The difference between this and the WP8 situation is mostly marketing. WP7 devices will get WP7.8, which includes many WP8 features, but not some that MS considers dependent on the hardware specs that differ betwen WP8 and WP7 (either because the older hardware doesn't support the feature at all or because using it on the older hardware would produce an unacceptable -- in MS's eyes -- user experience.)
While older iPhones nominally get the current iOS versions, the versions they get are lacking features that Apple feels are dependent on the newer device hardware (either because the older hardware doesn't support the feature at all or because using it on the older hardware would produce an unacceptable -- in Apple's eyes -- user experience.)
iOS 5 on the iPhone 3GS doesn't support the same features as iOS 5 on the iPhone 4, which doesn't support the same features as iOS 5 on the iPhone 4S. With iOS 6, that'll all still be true (and is increasingly true as more iOS devices are supported by the same nominal OS version.)
Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 by rtfa-troll · 2012-06-20 07:00 · Score: 1

It will run 7.8, an update that has most (if not all) of the non-hardware-specific features. The summary is incorrect.
This is not the era of feature phones. We do not just put a table of check boxes side by side. As Stephen Elop said:

With respect to comparisons to other ecosystem shifts and things like that, the real thing that one must focus on is the quality of products in the market, the momentum that one already has
This decision kills all momentym and means Windows Phone starts from zero. The software which works on Windows 8 will not work on Windows 7.8. "Just a recompile" is the difference between Linux which has many applications and SCO UNIX which is dead.
If you are a developer, this is the moment to get off the Wintanic and into a lifeboat before they get the engines started and head towards the iceberg again.

--
=~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 by Motard · 2012-06-20 07:05 · Score: 1

But if an app doesn't need the hardware specific features of WP8, it can remain a WP7(.8) app - and will run on all Windows Phones.
Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 by Bert64 · 2012-06-20 07:13 · Score: 2

iOS does indeed use a fully fledged OSX kernel, just like Android uses a fully fledged Linux kernel.
CLI based apps can run just fine with little more than a recompile, anything gui based obviously needs code changes not because the mobiles are not "fully fledged" but because a desktop ui would be really unusable on a mobile phone... That said, there is an implementation of X11 for android and even for iOS, not that you'd want to use it for anything.
Apple don't provide the same proprietary gui libs for phones as desktops because they would be unsuitable and result in unusable interfaces.
Existing windows apps will not work, at the very least you would need to recompile them (which for the majority of windows apps you cannot do due to not having sourcecode) or hope they were written atop a hardware neutral runtime...

--
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 by gstoddart · 2012-06-20 07:16 · Score: 1

This hurts WP7 users, but is great for developers.
Well, if you burn your goodwill with your users, there's not a hell of a lot of point in having developers -- because nobody will want it.
Anybody who bought one of these phones which is not going to get the upgrade is going to feel rather screwed over by this. Their next phone isn't as likely to be a gamble on Microsoft not pulling out the rug again and dropping those.
Basically it sounds like they're screwing their early adopters.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 by slimjim8094 · 2012-06-20 07:16 · Score: 1

iOS also isn't running on a full fledged OSX core.
I don't know if you're using "core" to mean "kernel" or "basic OS layout", but either way you'd be wrong. iOS is derived from OSX and shares the Darwin/XNU kernel, BSD subsystem and even the BSD userspace stuff with OSX. Most of the frameworks (Cocoa, etc) are also essentially the same or very similar.

--
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 by Mabhatter · 2012-06-20 08:31 · Score: 1

But the version number of the OS is the same, so the apps "just work" even if the devs had to cut something out ( and I have a few apps with grey buttons on my 3GS) but its SUPPORTED. Apps released.today.. We can has them!
And when we upgrade to iPad or iPhone 6? All the apps come along too... And the data in the cloud. When I bought my ipad2 it was loaded up with $300+ in apps I already paid for on the iPhone... I'm counting minutes for the next iPhone because my contract will be up and its a HUGE upgrade of stuff I ALREADY bought! (which is the same reason people keep buying windows on the desktop)
Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 by maztuhblastah · 2012-06-20 08:33 · Score: 2

I don't know if you're using "core" to mean "kernel" or "basic OS layout", but either way you'd be wrong. iOS is derived from OSX and shares the Darwin/XNU kernel, BSD subsystem and even the BSD userspace stuff with OSX. Most of the frameworks (Cocoa, etc) are also essentially the same or very similar.
Well he could be mostly right, actually.
Yes, the kernel and BSD userland are very, very similar, but once you move up the stack towards Cocoa there are actually quite a lot of differences. It's not as simple as s/NS/UI/ on the class names, case in point: JWZ's efforts to port Dali Clock.

--
The real litigious bastards...
Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 by danbob999 · 2012-06-20 08:47 · Score: 1

When I bought my ipad2 it was loaded up with $300+ in apps I already paid for on the iPhone... I'm counting minutes for the next iPhone because my contract will be up and its a HUGE upgrade of stuff I ALREADY bought! (which is the same reason people keep buying windows on the desktop)
I've never seen someone so happy in being vendor-locked.
Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 by countach · 2012-06-20 09:21 · Score: 1

Yeah but, WP7 and WP8 apps are supposedly compatible. So what part is supposedly so different they have to drop compatibility?
In any case, you can't call Cocoa "OS core", otherwise what is left to be non-core?
Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 by jimmyfrank · 2012-06-20 12:37 · Score: 1

But there are an insane amount of opportunities right now, I haven't had to look for work, it finds me. Really exciting time to be a .NET dev.
Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 by tjhart85 · 2012-06-20 13:46 · Score: 1

He's not happy about being vendor locked, he's happy because it's seamless to upgrade a device he LIKES to another device he'll like. There isn't really a downside to that.

When I upgraded my Android, I enabled the sync and I had damn near everything on my new phone (including settings) before I got home from the store. When I got home, it remembered my wifi settings from my previous phone and finished the sync on wifi. That's damn convenient! Is this a feature that will further make me consider Android in the future? Yes it is!
Re:iPhone 3GS will support iOS 6 by slimjim8094 · 2012-06-21 03:14 · Score: 1

Interesting. I'm just starting to get into iOS development, but I thought they were pretty much similar libraries.
And, as it turns out, from further down that page:

To be fair, you should be able to use CGColor identically on both OS X (10.3 or later) and iPhone OS, and CGImage to draw.
Jwz's complaint seems to be that the documentation isn't clear that the CG approach is the "blessed" way, and the one they'd be sticking with, but that's not entirely the same thing as "different APIs"

--
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.

*puke* by jampola · 2012-06-20 06:14 · Score: 1

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

Re:*puke* by DogDude · 2012-06-20 07:17 · Score: 1

What kind of person cares what a telephone looks like...? I'm curious. I've met anybody in person who describes electronic gadgets as "ugly".

--
I don't respond to AC's.
Re:*puke* by Tough+Love · 2012-06-20 07:29 · Score: 1

You are right, uglier than a wall plug.

--
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Re:*puke* by stewbacca · 2012-06-20 12:28 · Score: 1

What kind of person cares what a telephone looks like...? I'm curious. I've met anybody in person who describes electronic gadgets as "ugly".
There's an entire era of competing iPod devices that failed for this very reason.
Google Creative Zen and select "images". Check out some of those early/mid-2000 models and tell me you wouldn't describe those as "ugly".
Re:*puke* by DogDude · 2012-06-21 01:14 · Score: 1

I don't need to Google the Creative Zen. I own one. Works great.

--
I don't respond to AC's.
Re:*puke* by jampola · 2012-06-21 01:15 · Score: 1

You're absolutely right! And 99% of the time I am not that person (for Christ sake, I sold my Macbook years ago to buy a Thinkpad and haven't looked back since!). However, I am basing my judgement on the overall look (the phone, OS and the shape) and I will go as far to say that judging by the design and the square edges, that phone would be a pain to hold on to for long periods.

I think someone at MS said "Oh, you know what, since our OS looks like giant tiles, lets make our phone look like an giant tile too!"
Re:*puke* by jampola · 2012-06-21 01:17 · Score: 1

Yep, and that's why we now call him Sir Jonathan Ive.
Re:*puke* by stewbacca · 2012-06-21 01:30 · Score: 1

I didn't say anything about how it works...I was merely responding to your contention that people don't care about what their gadgets look like. Your works great. Fine. Personally I've never seen one in the wild, and I know their sales numbers where smoked by iPods of the same time, so it seems pretty clear that people don't want ugly gadgets, regardless of how well they work.
Re:*puke* by DogDude · 2012-06-21 02:55 · Score: 1

I'd have to disagree. A completely rounded phone is pretty tough to hold onto between one's ear and shoulder.

--
I don't respond to AC's.
Re:*puke* by DogDude · 2012-06-21 02:57 · Score: 1

And I'm saying that I think that people who buy electronic gadgets based on the appearance of said gadgets have some strange priorities.

--
I don't respond to AC's.
Re:*puke* by Yunzil · 2012-06-21 04:45 · Score: 1

Looks pretty nice to me. *shrug*
Re:*puke* by stewbacca · 2012-06-21 05:28 · Score: 1

Well you asked "what kind of person cares what a telephone looks like", and I was merely providing and answer...pretty much everyone. Sure it's a strange priority, but sales folks don't go on perceived priorities, they go on actual priorities.

Can't complain. by busyqth · 2012-06-20 06:14 · Score: 1

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. by h4rr4r · 2012-06-20 06:17 · Score: 1

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. by busyqth · 2012-06-20 06:43 · Score: 2

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.
Re:Can't complain. by busyqth · 2012-06-20 07:41 · Score: 1

"Shill" is such an ugly word. I prefer "internet public relations consultant".
Well, back to the grind. Only 4.5 hours left to go before I can hit the bunk. I will have funny stories to tell my dorm-mates as we drift off to sleep.
Re:Can't complain. by jimmyfrank · 2012-06-20 12:43 · Score: 1

But there will be an upgrade. 7.8.

Re:What's the advantage of so many OSs for Phones? by Microlith · 2012-06-20 06:16 · Score: 4, Insightful

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.

Summary is a lie. by Haxagon · 2012-06-20 06:16 · Score: 1

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. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 06:34 · Score: 1

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. by oiron · 2012-06-20 06:38 · Score: 4, Insightful

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. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 06:40 · Score: 1

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.
Re:Summary is a lie. by fluffythedestroyer · 2012-06-20 06:57 · Score: 1

it's not a lie. Current phones wont get the WP8 upgrade. the only thing they will get is version 7.8 only and not version 8
Re:Summary is a lie. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 07:54 · Score: 1

I don't think Corel is going to like that...

it's called hype/fud by poetmatt · 2012-06-20 06:17 · Score: 2

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 by Foxman98 · 2012-06-20 06:24 · Score: 5, Insightful

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.

--
S.t.e.v.e.
Re:it's called hype/fud by nedlohs · 2012-06-20 06:35 · Score: 1

Which is what he said. They are good at FUD but bad at hype.
This is about hype, and hence is badly done.

microSD cards by willoughby · 2012-06-20 06:21 · Score: 1

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

Re:microSD cards by Microlith · 2012-06-20 06:29 · Score: 5, Informative

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.
Re:microSD cards by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 07:41 · Score: 5, Informative

What does "better support for microSD cards" mean? Were they having problems with reliable reads/writes?
Not quite - they were having problems using them in a way that's sensible:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2450831
In short, once you put an SD card into a WP7 phone you can't take it out (or the phone won't boot) and you can't read it on any other devices. Each card model also needed to be "certified" before use.
Re:microSD cards by alices+ice · 2012-06-20 12:11 · Score: 1

ha. ha ha...god, seriously? that cannot be true surely?
Re:microSD cards by Zebedeu · 2012-06-21 05:24 · Score: 1

Not quite - they were having problems using them in a way that's sensible:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2450831
In short, once you put an SD card into a WP7 phone you can't take it out (or the phone won't boot) and you can't read it on any other devices. Each card model also needed to be "certified" before use.
So if you remove the SD card from the phone, neither the phone or the card will work as expected?
How's that sensible?

64 cores... by Junta · 2012-06-20 06:21 · Score: 5, Funny

64 cores should be enough for anyone!

--
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.

Re:64 cores... by Un+pobre+guey · 2012-06-20 06:36 · Score: 1

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

Re:What's the advantage of so many OSs for Phones? by busyqth · 2012-06-20 06:21 · Score: 5, Funny

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:I'm excited by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 06:21 · Score: 4, Funny

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:What's the advantage of so many OSs for Phones? by Lunix+Nutcase · 2012-06-20 06:22 · Score: 1

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

Phone owners screwed then? by Lumpy · 2012-06-20 06:26 · Score: 2

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.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.

Re:Phone owners screwed then? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 06:42 · Score: 1

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? by Missing.Matter · 2012-06-20 06:44 · Score: 3, Insightful

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.
Re:Phone owners screwed then? by jimicus · 2012-06-20 07:03 · Score: 1

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.
They can't. Embedded development invariably involves a certain degree of customising the OS to the hardware, which in this case would be done by Nokia.
That's one of the reasons Linux has taken embedded development by storm - suddenly the amount of customising involved plummets. But it's still not zero.
Re:Phone owners screwed then? by DarthStrydre · 2012-06-20 07:39 · Score: 1

there's a (free) app for that (tm).
Re:Phone owners screwed then? by jader3rd · 2012-06-20 08:20 · Score: 1

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.
Why? Are the existing phones going to magically stop being able to make calls?
Re:Phone owners screwed then? by NatasRevol · 2012-06-20 09:22 · Score: 1

And that's why marketing matters.
Done well, sells more.
Done poorly, sells a lot less.

--
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Re:Phone owners screwed then? by Lumpy · 2012-06-20 23:39 · Score: 1

Biggest problem is that Microsoft has a TRACK RECORD of screwing handset owners. IT's why they exited the smartphone market 5 years ago, sales went through the floor after they screwed handset owners over and over with Windows Mobile.
So they are coming back into the game with the "Oh yeah, you guys are the asshats" stigma, and they really should not start right down that road again.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:Phone owners screwed then? by Lumpy · 2012-06-20 23:42 · Score: 1

REally? show me a business that upgrades their phones every 6 months. They are tied to the same contracts. In fact MY experience with Fortune 500 is that they hold onto the fricking smartphones for a MINIMUM of 3 years.
So where did you get your information, I get mine by actually working in corporate america and see exactly how they deal with smartphone assets.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:Phone owners screwed then? by hairyfish · 2012-06-21 16:36 · Score: 1

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.
Did you actually read what you just wrote? When it comes to customer's money, Apple is MS on steroids.

Re:What's the advantage of so many OSs for Phones? by Microlith · 2012-06-20 06:28 · Score: 2

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:I'm excited by Haxagon · 2012-06-20 06:33 · Score: 2, Informative

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.

Metro compatible? by Billly+Gates · 2012-06-20 06:33 · Score: 1

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?

--
http://saveie6.com/

Re:Metro compatible? by ninjacut · 2012-06-20 09:34 · Score: 1

There is signifant sharing of code between these platforms now, the changes are more onto UI aspects due to screen changes. So technically you can write for one, and easily port it to others within few days. The video actually shows migration from iOS to Windows Phone 8 in few weeks (C/C++), so between Windows will be easier and one of the design goals

Re:Yawn by alen · 2012-06-20 06:35 · Score: 1

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:What's the advantage of so many OSs for Phones? by shadowrat · 2012-06-20 06:38 · Score: 1

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

Re:Yawn by Un+pobre+guey · 2012-06-20 06:39 · Score: 1

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?

Yawn... by jones_supa · 2012-06-20 06:43 · Score: 1

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.

Re:Yawn... by ninjacut · 2012-06-20 09:33 · Score: 1

You are just ignorant, you need to see the full video to see the changes. No other platform has such clean implementation of these features. Comparing that to Linux is so way off. Grow up !
Re:Yawn... by jones_supa · 2012-06-20 17:57 · Score: 1

Fair enough.

Upgrade program by lilfields · 2012-06-20 06:45 · Score: 1

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.

Re:I'm excited by TheNinjaroach · 2012-06-20 06:47 · Score: 1

a Windows Phone on Virgin Mobile would be a lot better than the cheap, often laggy Android devices they have.

My experience on VM has left me in the "Anything but Android" camp. Their current offerings are almost 100% Android based, much to my dismay.

--
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..

ARM and X86 are not the same so maybe not by Joe_Dragon · 2012-06-20 06:48 · Score: 1

ARM and X86 are not the same so maybe not or maybe only a limited set of API will work on both with the same code.

Re:ARM and X86 are not the same so maybe not by PCM2 · 2012-06-20 09:23 · Score: 1

ARM and X86 are not the same so maybe not or maybe only a limited set of API will work on both with the same code.
WinRT is that "limited set of API." That said, yeah, we're all kind of holding our breaths to find out. No confirmation yet, that I'm aware of.

--
Breakfast served all day!

Re:I'm excited by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 06:48 · Score: 3, Informative

Plus, a Windows Phone on Virgin Mobile would be a lot better than the cheap, often laggy Android devices they have.

I've read several of your comments and finally the bias comes out. I have the HTC Evo 4G on Virgin Mobile and it is not even remotely laggy. As far as WP7.8, it's fucking bullshit as WP8 apps will not be backward compatible.

OS Upgrading by LtGordon · 2012-06-20 06:56 · Score: 2

Can someone explain to me why Microsoft isn't capitalizing on the phone market in the same way they have the PC market? Why design a phone operating system that can only be run on a small niche of devices, and can't even upgrade phones that came with WP7? Why not instead go after the entire market and design an OS that can be installed on any mobile phone of adequate specifications.

While there may be some serious difficulties to overcome in the short term, this to me seems like a very possible end-state for the industry. Just look at what happened in the (non-Apple) PC market: competing hardware+OS standards evolved into a common hardware standard and a separate OS market that Microsoft dominated.

Disclaimer: this is not necessarily an end-state that I would like to see happen, just some ponderings that I've had.

Re:OS Upgrading by Tough+Love · 2012-06-20 07:21 · Score: 3, Interesting

Can someone explain to me why Microsoft isn't capitalizing on the phone market in the same way they have the PC market?
There are ten reasons:
1) Microsoft failed to leverage its PC monopoly onto mobile devices by fair means or foul.
2) Microsoft held onto its desktop centric UI model until it was too late (then overreacted in the other direction, threatening its desktop business)
3) Nobody trusts Microsoft.
4) Carriers do not trust Microsoft.
5) Developers do not trust Microsoft.
6) Partners do not trust Microsoft.
7) Manufacturers do not trust Microsoft.
8) The DoJ does not trust Microsoft.
9) Nobody trusts Microsoft.
10) The engineering culture at Microsoft is toxic and minimally productive.

--
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Re:OS Upgrading by ninjacut · 2012-06-20 09:31 · Score: 1

They tried that route till 6.5, without vertical integration the final product will not stand chance against Apple with its tightly controlled software and hardware. The specification boundaries is helping them achieve excellent performance across all devices. Check it yourself, a single core device performing as fast as dual core. So the approach is right, and unfortunately the only one available to be relevant in the market.
Re:OS Upgrading by PCM2 · 2012-06-20 09:38 · Score: 1

You could have done better than to repeat yourself, methinks. How about:
11) Too many false starts, destroying confidence in the brand (which is now essentially being jettisoned in favor of a new one)
12) Phones run on ARM, and ARM is just a concept -- there's no one chipmaker that Microsoft can collude with like it did with Intel
13) Microsoft's demonstrated failure to execute in the consumer electronics market (Zune)
14) Microsoft's desire to tie its phone OS to its desktop OS demands too much of partners and only benefits Microsoft (buy an iPhone and it still works great if you have a Mac)
15) Microsoft tried offering an OS that ran on a wide range of devices, but it went too far, so its phone OS was based on the same as the OS it was marketing to the people who build ATMs and car navigation systems
16) Microsoft doesn't really want another PC market anymore; now it wants a piece of Apple's market, i.e. acting as middleman on every single software and media transaction on the platform and taking its cut. It figures the best way to pull that off (and maintain its strict licensing terms) is to follow closely in Apple's footsteps.

--
Breakfast served all day!
Re:OS Upgrading by Tough+Love · 2012-06-20 09:57 · Score: 1

You could have done better than to repeat yourself, methinks...
Oh yeah, don't I know it. But on the other hand if my list was complete where would be the fun for you?

--
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Re:OS Upgrading by stewbacca · 2012-06-20 12:50 · Score: 1

(buy an iPhone and it still works great if you have a Mac)
Most iPhone users use their iPhones with Windows PC. Sure, they are great when you also have a Mac, but it seems a lot of people think they are great even if you are using a PC.
Re:OS Upgrading by phantomfive · 2012-06-20 13:08 · Score: 1

They never made an OS that can be run on all computers. They made an OS that could run on IBM computers, and soon all the manufacturers were making computers that would run their OS.

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Re:OS Upgrading by LtGordon · 2012-06-20 13:18 · Score: 1

I never claimed that Windows ran on all computers. Notice how I said that the market moved towards a common hardware standard. It wouldn't be unreasonable for mobile phones to do the same; they already run almost exclusively ARM CPU's.

Nokia's New Platform Burns Brighter, Faster! by Freshly+Exhumed · 2012-06-20 06:58 · Score: 2

Osborne Effect round 2, here we go, kicking Nokia in the nuts when its down. Elop will tell us all to just wait a bit longer for his master plan to work and profits to start happening.

--
I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.

Re:Nokia's New Platform Burns Brighter, Faster! by Tough+Love · 2012-06-20 07:33 · Score: 1

Osborne Effect round 2, here we go, kicking Nokia in the nuts when its down. Elop will tell us all to just wait a bit longer for his master plan to work and profits to start happening.
I trust he has already moved his signing bonus to an offshore bank account.

--
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Re:Nokia's New Platform Burns Brighter, Faster! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-20 09:15 · Score: 1

It will happen! Nokia just needs to use all the cash it has to get rid of all the employees, and that will take some time, but a year from now Nokia will be a lean, mean corporate machine consisting of Elop and a great team of American execs and no one else and no assets. That's when their comeback will start.
Re:Nokia's New Platform Burns Brighter, Faster! by Doctor_Jest · 2012-06-20 12:35 · Score: 2

Microsoft must REALLY hate Nokia. :) This is pretty low even for them... It's rather harsh that the "Beta test is over" for smartphones, only if you don't buy a WP7 phone. (yes, "some" or "most" of the Win 8 features are in store for WP7.8, but let's be realistic, how much of that is hype and how much is it technically correct... not to mention, how long before WP8 is required for phone apps?)
Still, Microsoft really hasn't had a clue since the internet took off (they had leveraged power in existing markets to fend off oblivion, but let's face it, Bill Gates even thought the internet was a "fad".) Some divisions get it, but it appears that the "Duke of Stupid" Steve Ballmer is sabotaging the company for his ADHD riddled ideas. He's not Bill Gates, as we plainly see. He isn't even pretending he can be Bill, so unless a miracle happens, Microsoft will continue to spiral downward trying to grasp at markets they spent too long ignoring. All with that sweaty cheese-eating surrender monkey claiming how great it is to work for Microsoft. (Yeah, monkeyboy... when you've got those kinds of stock options, is SURE is...)
I have often wished for the fiery, explosive death of all things Microsoft, but now, it's just not fun anymore. It's like smacking a retarded kid with a shoe. It just rings hollow off the helmet.

--
It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.

Clippy and the 911 Call by LifesABeach · 2012-06-20 07:00 · Score: 2

"I hear you're having a life threating event. Do you need an app for that?"

Re:I'm excited by neros1x · 2012-06-20 07:04 · Score: 1

I must just lucky. My Android phones on VM are excellent for my needs. Sony Xperia play right now...I can play SNES with a gamepad while sitting on the pot.

--
The penguin made me do it.

Re:What's the advantage of so many OSs for Phones? by Bert64 · 2012-06-20 07:06 · Score: 1

Control... Vendors don't want a standard they can all be compatible with and compete on a level playing field, they want a monopoly with a locked in proprietary product that makes competing against them more difficult.

--
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!

Burning platforms by Tough+Love · 2012-06-20 07:12 · Score: 1

Burning brightly right out of the gate.

--
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.

Windows Mobile is a lost cause by neros1x · 2012-06-20 07:13 · Score: 1

I like what I see with surface. Maybe MS should focus on building ultraportables that can run apps common to tablets and metro desktops, kind of how Sony did the PS3/Vita crossplatform. Sort of like turning Surface into an extension for your desktop, and a stand a lone tablet. It would work very well with the cloud.

--
The penguin made me do it.

Re:Windows Mobile is a lost cause by neros1x · 2012-06-22 07:07 · Score: 1

About 15 years ago, we could have said the same about Apple. MS has been fucking up for a while, but the surface is interesting. I am willing to wait and see what they do with it, and if they have learned from their mistakes.

--
The penguin made me do it.
Re:Windows Mobile is a lost cause by neros1x · 2012-06-22 07:12 · Score: 1

And I was psyched about the keyboard cover. It makes a tablet actually useful to me now, as I can use it like a laptop when I need to. Touch screen keyboards are terrible for anything but short messages. Work well on a phone, but not for typing several pages.

--
The penguin made me do it.

Re:I'm excited by hawaiian717 · 2012-06-20 07:16 · Score: 1

Only for 9 more days, as Virgin Mobile USA will release the iPhone 4 and 4S on June 29.

--
End of Line.

Re:SSDD by DogDude · 2012-06-20 07:20 · Score: 1

Considering that the average person changes cell phones as often as their underwear, I don't see why upgradability is such a big deal for cell phones. I've got a Windows Phone running 7.5 It works fine. I wouldn't expect a new OS on the phone, ever, quite frankly. I do expect that on desktop machines, which is why our company is 100% MS.

--
I don't respond to AC's.

Re:I'm excited by Guspaz · 2012-06-20 07:22 · Score: 1

The Xperia Play would be a terrible choice to buy today considering the fact that it's an obsolete phone both in terms of hardware (small RAM, slower CPU, very slow GPU, low-res screen) and software (doesn't support current Android release 4.x).

It was a decent phone when it came out over a year ago, but if nothing else the fact that Sony has abandoned support for it should discourage new purchases today.

Re:SSDD by kimvette · 2012-06-20 07:28 · Score: 1

Considering that the average person changes cell phones as often as their underwear, I don't see why upgradability is such a big deal for cell phones.

Is that you, Ballmer?

This is why Apple is dominating the market. They get it when it comes to upgradability. :-)

--
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50

Re:Depends if Elop wants to go to prison by busyqth · 2012-06-20 07:34 · Score: 1

Well as Finnish prisons are widely said to be comparable to caribbean resort hotels, I'm sure he's quaking in his boots at the prospect.

Re:SSDD by sexconker · 2012-06-20 07:37 · Score: 1

Spread more FUD, please:

In ye olden days, I updraded my Samsung Blackjack from Windows Mobile 5 to Windows Mobile 6.
Officially.
For free.

http://www.samsung.com/us/support/SupportOwnersFAQPopup.do?faq_id=FAQ00002911&fm_seq=3079

This isn't an MS problem it's OEMs not supporting devices and wanting people to buy new ones. Same shit that plagues Android.
It's worse with Apple because when they pull it it's not an lazy/incompetent OEM, it's the judge, jury, and executioner locking out certain features of iOS updates for no technical reason.

So confused right now... by BumpyCarrot · 2012-06-20 07:53 · Score: 1

How does this relate to Windows RT? When are Microsoft going to calm down and stop forking off a million different mobile/embedded OS? Having made it clear they want to "do an Apple" with regards to software/hardware marriage, when are they going to learn that Apple's more consistent approach to these concerns is what a lot of consumers appreciate?

64 cores?!

--
Do you see what I did there?

Popular? by joek1010 · 2012-06-20 08:35 · Score: 5, Funny

Microsoft announced the successor to its popular Windows Phone 7 platform

Wait, what?

Re:Popular? by ninjacut · 2012-06-20 09:25 · Score: 1

I like your modesty, you are out of touch. The users are fully satisfied once they start using it, the problem is the wireless providers are peddling what they think is the best and not what is the reality. So it is popular phone in its user community, why should it be popular with iPhone or Android folks?
Re:Popular? by vallette · 2012-06-20 11:03 · Score: 2

No, he's not out of touch. Defining popular as something that's "liked by people that like it" now that's out of touch (but it's probably the only way most /. readers made it through high school).
Re:Popular? by stewbacca · 2012-06-20 13:01 · Score: 1

To be fair, I do think I'm a bit out of touch, since I moved back to the US in 2007, coinciding with the iPhone launch, and my first (and only) "smart" phone being an iPhone...but I do work in an industry that caters to mobile platforms and Windows Phone is nowhere on any development lifecycle. I've generated millions of dollars of training for Android and iOS apps (defense contracting), but not $1 in Windows Phone. In fact, when our company was challenged to create the new de-facto military standard for smart phones, one of our devs did his proposal for Windows Phone (old version, don't remember which) and you couldn't even pinch or spread to zoom the map, when all other options could (not counting crappy Blackberry devices). What infantry grunt would want an easy, intuitive iPhone or Google Map powered Android device to zoom in and out on the map? (hint: all of them). Windows Fail...and that was recent history. Sure, they've fixed it, but this is a repeating pattern in my 30 years of technology training experience. Microsoft is consistently the last and worst to market. When they can't leverage their desktop monopoly, they got nothin'.
With that, however, the last time I went to an AT&T store for something for my iPhone service plan, I messed around with a Windows phone. I say I would definitely choose it over any Android phone. It was actually really nice, which should be Microsoft's number one priority from here on out if they ever want to recover lost ground.

I'm confused by marcosdumay · 2012-06-20 08:42 · Score: 1

How does Windows Phone 8 relates to Windows 8 for phones? Is that still another iteration of an OS that will die in (by MS's predictions) half a year?

--
Rethinking email

Market division vs. forward thinking by swb · 2012-06-20 08:49 · Score: 1

An external display was my first thought, and it seems like the forward thinking idea -- which is kinda-sorta here already -- is that the phone WILL be the laptop/PC for many people, and jacking it into a dock or a slot or via some kind of wireless device mirroring mode so you can use a full keyboard/mouse/display.

But building a phone that does that would cut off PC OS and app sales and Microsoft would rather sell you a limited device so that you have to turn around and buy another device chock full of MS hardware later on.

The smartest thing Microsoft could have done five years ago would be to have setup a mobile division someplace like Manhattan or Orange County, given them $5 billion and access to the panoply of MS IP and then left them alone until they had a finished product for MS to sell.

Microsoft consistently hinders their own new product development by allowing existing product managers to cripple new products in order to save existing products. Thus you end up with a phone that will never compete with a desktop, despite the fact that the future stand-alone desktop looks an awful lot like a cell phone with a keyboard and a monitor.

Re:I'm excited by oxdas · 2012-06-20 08:51 · Score: 3, Insightful

I love my phone on Virgin Mobile. It isn't the latest, greatest hardware, but its fantastic for the price. The problem with the Android phones I have had is that they are terrible stock, but can be great phones once rooted and have a decent mod on them.

Re:I'm excited by oxdas · 2012-06-20 08:55 · Score: 1

My daughter has that phone. It is very slow and the battery life is terrible with the stock rom, but once it is rooted and running the backside mod, it works fine (nearly doubled the battery life) and overclocking helps greatly with the speed.

Popular? by stewbacca · 2012-06-20 08:59 · Score: 2

Microsoft announced the successor to its popular Windows Phone 7 platform.

Perhaps I'm out of touch, and this isn't meant to be snarky, but that's an interesting definition of "popular". Honestly I've never seen a Windows 7 phone.

Re:SSDD by marcosdumay · 2012-06-20 09:03 · Score: 1

The amount of noise around every time iOS or Android phones can't be upgraded support the hypotesis that most people do not "change cell phones as often as their underwear".

Nearly nobody buys new phones more than once a year. Not on places where people don't get into contracts, and hell not in places where people have contracts. Contracts tend to last between 1 or 2 years, non-contract phones tends to last longer.

Now, assume everybody changed their phone every 2 years... If you release a new OS every 2 years, people will stay on average 1 year with an obsolete phone. (And remember that's an average, some unfortunate ones will stay 23 months and 29 days with an obsolete phone.) If new software won't run on it, you've just halved the usefullnes of all your phones.

--
Rethinking email

typo or just sneaky? by Thud457 · 2012-06-20 09:11 · Score: 1

Kin Phone 9

heh

--

the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

They have come long way in short time, it is good by ninjacut · 2012-06-20 09:18 · Score: 1

Considering the late start, the Windows Phone team has done a great job on this OS. The UI is best, and all features slick and well implemented. Its just matter of time to get the market share it deserves. I know slasdotters will find it difficult to accept, but the product is good and it will be in the top 3 contenders from here on.

Re:SSDD by ninjacut · 2012-06-20 09:22 · Score: 1

exactly, and the key features will be available in Windows Phone 7.8 update and what is missing requires hardware upgrade so it makes sense. Not sure why such hue and cry

Re:What's the advantage of so many OSs for Phones? by Nerdfest · 2012-06-20 09:32 · Score: 1

People were posting on a story here that choice of browser engine son iOS would be a bad thing. There was something similar on another story today, where a fan stated that walled gardens were good and that people shouldn't be allowed to install non-approved software. Apple has prepared people for lack of options quite well. Microsoft must be rubbing their greedy little hands thinking of the money they'll make with their locked Metro market.

Re:I'm excited by pkinetics · 2012-06-20 09:58 · Score: 1

Does that mean someone would have to buy their apps twice? Clever MS and their billing / app count strategy.

WP7 already does by cbhacking · 2012-06-20 10:54 · Score: 1

Admittedly, this is about WP8, and so there's no guarantee that they won't manage to actually lock the bootloader properly this time. However, quite a few WP7 devices already have bootloader unlocks and custom ROMs available. All of the HTC phones, the gen1 Samsung phones, and some of the Lumias are currently able to load and run custom ROMs.

Actually, that raises an interesting question: just how hard will it be to port WP8 unofficially? The difference in the hardware is going to be significant, but not necessarily crippling (for example, the HD2, a WinMo phone, has several very nice WP7 custom ROMs available for it which work around the fact that it doesn't quite conform to the WP7 chassis spec).

Furthermore, the question of "what (aside from hardware-dependent features) will WP8 get that WP7.8 wont?" is quite relevant. There's no reason that I can see why WP7.8, even if it sticks with the current kernel design, couldn't feature Skype call integration and proper turn-by-turn navigation.

In fact, my suspicion is that this whole thing is yet another collassal marketing/branding fuckup by Microsoft. Obviously, WP8 will support hardware than no WP7.x phone has; that's fine and will provide a compelling upgrade path. But unless there's some serious reason that the current phones can't run WP8 (the only thing that comes to mind is that a 1GHz ARM chip might be too slow, and even then that only applies to the earlier WP7 devices) I suspect they'll actually release "WP7.8" as simply a build of WP8 that lacks the drivers for new hardware. In which case, the obvious question is "Why not just call it WP8 the way Apple calls it iOS 5 even on phones that can't fully use iOS 5 features"?

The only answer I can see to that is because Microsoft, especially where phones are concerned, has absolutely no fucking clue how to do branding properly. The approach they're taking is already making people forget claim the death of WP7 as a platform, even as another update for it rolls out now (Tango) and a fourth (Apollo, or whatever they're calling 7.8) has been announced. All Microsoft had to do to forstall that was announce that WP8 would in fact come to WP7 devices, but due to the older hardware would be unable to use some features.

--
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...

Up to 64 moble cores by nurb432 · 2012-06-20 10:55 · Score: 1

its going to need it..

--
---- Booth was a patriot ----

Re:What's the advantage of so many OSs for Phones? by busyqth · 2012-06-20 10:59 · Score: 1

There won't be any need for lots of different companies. They're inefficient.
Scientific industrial policy can being much greater efficiencies to bear.

As it happens, I've been further developing my idea this afternoon. I even came up with a good name for the scientific industrial planning organization: Unified Societal Solutions Regulator.
I think it's got quite a ring to it.

Re:I'm excited by jimmyfrank · 2012-06-20 12:14 · Score: 1

"Why would someone bother writing WP8 apps right after WP7 got orphaned?" -It's fun -Really easy. -Takes very little time. -Excellent dev tools.

Re:What's the advantage of so many OSs for Phones? by stewbacca · 2012-06-20 12:20 · Score: 1

Too bad we didn't have something like the Internet come along in the mid 90s and make system incompatibilities irrelevant.

Re:WP8 by jimmyfrank · 2012-06-20 12:50 · Score: 1

All the current apps in the marketplace will run on WP8.

Re:They have come long way in short time, it is go by jimmyfrank · 2012-06-20 12:54 · Score: 1

Praying? Funny stuff, go look around, C# is probably one of the most in demand skills right now. In this case Anonymous Coward is spot on.

Biggest Feature by thatkid_2002 · 2012-06-20 16:06 · Score: 3, Interesting

Is probably just the switch to the NT kernel from a stripped (legacy removed) CE kernel. I hope the speed and stability carries through! It's so weird saying that about a Microsoft product but as anybody who has actually used WP7 knows, it's generally rock solid.

Switching to the NT kernel is what has enabled the multicore support and it probably also enables the use of any future x86 hardware platforms too. Obviously moving to NT also helps Microsoft unify their infrastructure because it means they only have 1 kernel to worry about (and mostly just the Metro framework).

Normally I'd be the first one to bash Microsoft about the whole WP8 not being on older devices thing, but since WP8 runs a completely different kernel it'd be foolish to expect them to support older devices which probably don't even have device drivers written for the NT kernel.

Talk to me when I can get apps for it by Vrtigo1 · 2012-06-21 02:16 · Score: 2

The company I work for just had a bid led by our MS developers to start issuing Windows phones to employees. They ordered some demo units and gave them out and the next day when people started coming to IT and asking "how do I download skype?", "how can I get pandora?" the fact that apps make or break a phone platform finally sunk in.

Re:I'm excited by neros1x · 2012-06-22 07:04 · Score: 1

Agreed. I was merely pointing out that pure performance and hardware aren't the only reasons to buy a phone. The Xperia is far from perfect, but I wanted a gamepad.

--
The penguin made me do it.

Funny? by xded · 2012-06-22 10:57 · Score: 1

Does this really have to be marked +5 Funny? How far away into the future will we mark it Informative? (Not that I expect for /. to survive that long...)

Slashdot Mirror

Windows Phone 8 Officially Unveiled

299 of 414 comments (clear)