Microsoft Killing Off Windows Phone Brand Name In Favor of Just Windows

DroidJason1 writes Microsoft is killing off the "Windows Phone" name in favor of Windows. The company also plans to drop the "Nokia" name from handsets in favor of just "Lumia." These details were revealed in a leaked memo. We've already begun seeing these changes in recent advertisements from Microsoft and it makes perfect sense seeing as how Microsoft is shifting towards one operating system to rule them all.

Comments

KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[l0ungeb0y]

In favor of "Blatant Attempt at Ripping-Off the Apple Store" Not as catchy, but accurate

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[NoNonAlphaCharsHere]

Microsoft has been killing off the Windows Phone brand name for years now -- by releasing Windows Phones.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[praxis]

Because selling software in an online market place is clearly all invented by Apple

It wasn't, but I'm pretty sure that point is irrelevant as the OP meant the glass-and-steel Apple stores.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[ericloewe]

Spoken like someone who's never used one.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[MightyMartian]

Yes, like the vast majority of smart phone users.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[0123456]

Spoken like someone who's never used one.

One of my girlfriend's friends had a Windows Phone. As soon as the contract was up, she replaced it with Android.

I've never seen another one out in the wild, so I'm guessing that's why no-one else has never used one.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Noah Haders]

apple uses aluminum and granite, not steel. or as the friends across the pond say, aluminium and granite.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[PopeRatzo]

Yes, like the vast majority of smart phone users.

The vast majority of smart phone users don't use iPhones, but Apple's done pretty well.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[praxis]

windows stands or well I'm not doing office work suckers.

The first sentences of your comment were painful to read, but after several passes I understood you. The last sentence--quoted above--has stumped me even after several attempts to parse it. I gather you feel we are suckers and you do not do office work, but Windows stands or well? Could you please rephrase?

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[praxis]

apple uses aluminum and granite, not steel. or as the friends across the pond say, aluminium and granite.

If that is the case, then I stand corrected. The OP was referring to Apple's glass-and-aluminum stores.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[MightyMartian]

That's because Apple still has meaningful market share.

This whole notion of ratios has you a bit confused I see.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Anonymous Coward]

I own 2 of them. They were dirt cheap - $50 each for the Lumia 520. I bought them because I needed multiple phone numbers that were not obviously linked together. Coupled with H2O Wireless I pay $10 for 300 minutes that last for 90 days so it was a very good deal for my low-volume requirements.

They are very slick, especially with the latest software. The UI is super smooth and very clean, screen looks good, thin, battery lasts a long time. I don't have many apps installed, not a big fan of the popular apps. The main thing I miss is the ability to root them like android, so no ad-blocker, and file transfer between them and linux (I don't have a windows pc) is a pita.

The name "windows phone" was hard enough to google for without a lot of noise, "lumia" is super easy to search on, but just "Windows" will make searching the web for windows-phone specific information essentially impossible.

Product names that are so generic that you can't easily search on them piss me off. Don't these companies know how the internet works?

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[praxis]

or = for

Therefore:
Well I'm Not Doing Office Work Suckers = WINDOWS

Ah! Thank you. That's cute but silly.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Penguinisto]

One small problem with your statement:

The vast majority of smart phone users don't use iPhones, but Apple's done pretty well.

A very significant portion of the public does use iPhones (here in PDX it's roughly half and half). The only two human beings I've seen who use and *like* Windows Phones were as follows: a gent who wanted something cheap and worked in .NET for a living, and a visiting Microsoft TAM.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[ormico]

Because Apple invented selling products in physical stores?

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Imagix]

I've used multiple Windows Phones ranging all the way back to the WinCE devices, Windows Mobile, to Windows Phone. Never been happy with any of them. Then ended up on Android and stayed there ever since. (I do have an iPad, so I use iOS, just not on the phone)

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Noah Haders]

true story (it was from the Isaacson bio of SJ): steve was always on the lookout for excellent materials and craftsmanship. When travelling in Italy he noticed that the sidewalks of some Mediterranean town were exceptionally smooth with no wear, and they were installed during the renaissance. so he hunted down the quarry that was the source for the sidewalk, and uses material from that quarry for the flooring in every single apple store worldwide. talk about attention to detail.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[exomondo]

The reality is that Windows Phone has the same problem as desktop Linux. It is actually quite a good operating system and works really well with a broad set of features but it was late to the game and you cannot disrupt an established market without a disruptive product.

Sure people could switch to it but why would they? It - like desktop Linux - lacks some killer feature, some really compelling and disruptive element that would convince people to switch. For this reason I see it - again like desktop Linux - remaining a niche product used by a relatively small band of loyal followers and/or becoming popular in the developing market. But does that really matter? So long as that share is enough to sustain it then it will continue and the more competition we have the better.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[jitterman]

I've had one for two years now (okay, two - a 920 and now a 1520). I was initially skeptical, but I love the platform. It's actually impressively good. It certainly took MS a while to catch up, but they truly have. The sad thing is that since there's no cachet in the name, and since they're not the best at marketing, few people (percentage-wise) will truly realize that Windows 8.1 on a handset is a platform that isn't just use-*able*, it's a platform you will honestly *want* to use.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[praxis]

Because Apple invented selling products in physical stores?

No, but if you've ever been inside a Microsoft Store you'll understand the original poster's point. They *do* feel very creepily similar to the Apple stores in layout, look and feel. No other store (other than those two) I've been in has the same feel. BestBuys feel different. So do Fry's. So do AT&T store. Pretty much any other store one might go into and buy a device that has a battery or plugs into a wall.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[praxis]

I don't doubt you, I just never inspected or read about their buildings enough to know this. Steel is a pretty prevalent building material and I made an assumption. I'm not surprised, given Jobs's attention to detail, though.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[rtb61]

In this case it was all pre-planned. Basically the whole batshit crazy idea, lets turn the computer desktop into a phone interface to force users who don't want it to get used to the windows phone interface and buy it like mindless lemmings.

Apparently that whole batshit crazy plan backfired and did more damage to windows on the desktop than it ever did to force acceptance of windows on a phone.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Noah Haders]

I'm sure the support structure is steel.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[newsdee]

I don't think "Windows Phone 8.1" and "Windows 8.1" are really the same though? If they truly released the full OS on a phone it would be fantastic, but in my old experience from the Windows CE days, you get a watered down version of an OS which does not truly compare. So it feels misleading that they call it the same. Now I could be wrong and maybe they've managed to bring some compatibility, which would definitely be interesting.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Osgeld]

I have used a few though the years, all the in rom apps worked quite well, cant really say much about 3rd party aps, cause there weren't any

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[daremonai]

Windows Phone has 6% market share in Germany, the iPhone around 12-15%. Though both have been dropping of late.

Do you work at Microsoft Deutschland, by any chance?

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[ozmanjusri]

I don't doubt you,

I doubt everyone, so I checked.

OP and the other posters are wrong. The stone is not granite, it's sandstone, and was chosen for it's color and consistency, not it's wear capabilities.

Now it’s revealed that the process of creating the stone floor tiles and large wall slabs falls to the Il Casone quarry, formed in 1962 by four stonemason families with generations of experience in creating subtle beauty from rough rock. The company’s quarry is north of Florence in the small town of Firenzuola, in the heart of a geologic region of sandstone called Pietra Serena. The blue-gray color of the stone, its texture and tone all contribute to the overall look of the finished Apple store.

http://www.ifoapplestore.com/2...

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Richy_T]

Not contradictory.

But I agree, "vast" is not correct.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Bing Tsher E]

The most common smartphone in the world is the iPhone!

That's just because there is such a limited model selection of iPhones. Generally one or two models on the market at a time. Even with a midget market share they can claim to be 'most common.'

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Bing Tsher E]

If your most recent experience is 'the Windows CE days' you really aren't entitled to an opinion. I have a Windows 8.1 tablet, they're available for no more than a high end Android tablet now, and with a real x86 processor in them so they're not one of those stunted Windows RT things. It's really nice as long as you can stay in Metro. I wish there were more Metro apps, but for what most people do with a tablet the platform is well covered.

I also have a recent 10" Android tablet and an older 7". The thing I'll probably never buy new again is an iOS device. My iPod Touches kept falling 'obsolete' soon after I bought them. They also failed much earlier than anything I've had since.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[exomondo]

So? The point is Apple "has done pretty well" not because the vast majority of people use iPhones - because they don't - but because the iPhone is the most common phone.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[exomondo]

It's not supposed to be contradictory.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[lgw]

In terms of units sold, Windows phone outsells iPhone in poorer parts of the world.

Honestly, it's fine as a phone, nothing wrong with it. It's not at all like the WinCE phones (seriously, they named the OS "wince", eesh). I played with them in the store this summer, and the UI is pretty slick, but there are so few apps. MS really needs to find a way to run Android apps too if they expect the phone to ever take off.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[gl4ss]

no it isn't.

the only good thing is that it's easy to develop apps for it because it's so limited you don't have to worry about much.

but if they drop the Phone from the name, then that's just another fail. good luck explaining to your grandma that she can't run her Windows 8.1 app on her Windows 8.1 device but can run on it on the Other Windows 8.1 device and explaining to a client that they can the android version on android tablet and some randon android device but need to develop separate app versions for windows 8.1 device and the other windows 8.1 device.

you see, before you unify naming you should fucking UNIFY THE FUCKING OPERATING SYSTEMS, not create 3 different one's with vaguely similar look but wildly differing capabilities!

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[I'm New Around Here]

I caught the or/for thing, but not the acronym. Thanks for asking. We're all enlightened now. :^)

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Pi1grim]

The thing that shines most of all is lack of VPN support. We all know how corporate world hates to use secure connections for their employees. Oh, wait...

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Pi1grim]

Well, this.

"No, sir, this is the windows, that doesn't run windows apps. Well, I mean it does, but only the new, Metro, I meant Modern Interface (or whatever MS rebrands their interface to this time). To run old windows apps you'll need a different kind of windows."

I guess someone at MS thought that after using FUD on Linux and seeing it's success they should try go and FUD themselves in hopes of having the same effect.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Barsteward]

The Lumias look like they are a "Toys R Us" product designed for children

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[lgw]

The apps from big companies are there, right? Kindle, Audible, Netflix, that sort of thing? I can't think of any way to filter the rest effectively, since the latest craze always seems to be from some indie company.

Windows has never once succeeded when playing Apple wannabe. If your idea is to make some sort of "elite phone for (people who think themselves) smart people", sorry, MS will never be fashionable. Nor will it ever be geek chic - too many bridges burned. Its current strength is in the low-end market and the app store would need to be compatible with that.

I'd absolutely love to see a store full of $2-5 games with no phoning home or in-app purchases, rather then free games with that BS, and I think it would sell well, but how the heck would you actually do that without a seriously labor-intensive screening process?

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Gumbercules!!]

I actually have one - and (feel free to check my comment history on this) - I'm a long time Android fan (including running a pro-Android blog). I just got a bit bored and wanted to play with something else - also I finally cracked the shits at the lag on my Android.

Will my next phone be Windows Phone (or Windows or whatever)? Probably not - I'll probably go back to Android - but I won't rule out staying on Windows. I've promised myself to give it a genuine go. So far, it's only been a month and it's been not bad. Not great but not bad, either. The phone is like 85% of the way there - but that final 15% matters and it's a nuisance. Apps are poorly covered and there's lots of stupid querks, such as all the eBook readers need the eBooks in One Drive, not the local disk, which is annoying when you're on a slow link. And you absolutely cannot download from the store if a file is bigger than 50mb unless you're on wifi. This is a hard coded OS fact - not an option. But my wifi is hooked up to my DSL and in Australia, DSL is slow as hell and 4g is fast. So that's annoying as shit, too. Lots of things like that are annoying but overall, I am working on it (it's a Nokia 930 btw). The camera is beautiful and the build quality is great (I'm used to Samsung, mind you). Still... those Moto X's are looking pretty nice and I'm really missing my Google Maps.

We'll see where I go in a few months time.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[davester666]

Yes, Microsoft really should stop making stupid 'wrapper' apps that just wrap a companies web site in a webview and then surprising the company by making it seem as if the company made it.

Surprise, we made an app for you and we didn't even tell you. and here are some ex-customers of yours that are very angry with this very crappy app. why don't you make a proper one for windows phone to try to fix the problem?

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[bingoUV]

While there is such a thing as a "high quality" app, it is a very low barrier - 99% of Android Play Store apps are "high quality". Basically if an app doesn't crash during its core functionality, and performs the core functionality, it is "high quality". Rest is all subjective.

That doesn't mean many people will like or find use in 99% of Android Play Store apps - different people will like and use different apps. But that doesn't mean there is any criteria set in stone making the not used apps "low quality".

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[MaskedSlacker]

Don't these companies know how the internet works?

No. That's been MS's problem for 20 years.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[arglebargle_xiv]

Has someone tried to verify the original story and check that Windows Phones are a real product? If they were actually being sold I'm pretty sure I'd have seen someone using one by now.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[temcat]

Yes, like the vast majority of smart phone users.

I see what you did there.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[gtall]

Even if Linux had a compelling and disruptive element, it wouldn't convince business to leave MS's demented ecosystem. And as soon as Linux had one, MS would be right there the next day saying to everyone, "Me too, Me too! And just wait 'till next year when we integrate with the rest of our crap."

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[sillybilly]

"Lumia" is another retarded name like gnu or gnome or gimp or soylentnews or... a name speaks volumes of attitudes.. why cant they keep the brand recognized and national river named "Nokia" name? wait.. thats what an ownership takeover means, we paid you so now we can smear you up with shit..

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[PopeRatzo]

I didn’t realize that it was considered rude to disagree critically with someone’s written advice published in a daily circulation by stating clearly what you thought.

Do honestly believe that the people you see daily comprise enough of the population of Vancouver for you to make such a pronouncement? Man, you white folks are kooky.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[PopeRatzo]

This whole notion of ratios has you a bit confused I see.

You might think that if you misunderstand my point.

I was responding to the OP's statement that the "vast majority" of users don't use Windows Phones and that was evidence that they are failure. They may well be a failure, don't get me wrong, but that's not the reason.

The "vast majority" has never been a measurement of quality. The OP's argument was basically an extension of the old, "If you're so smart, why ain't you rich?" fallacy.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Anne Thwacks]

"Lumia" is Latin for "burned out deck" - you missed the benefits of public school education ;-)

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[ericloewe]

FUD much?

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[jitterman]

Whoa, simma! :)

Let me address this in a narrow band. It's a good user experience when we limit our discussion to the user experience on the phone itself, removing programming considerations from a developer POV, and from an "I bought an app for my PC but it doesn't run on my phone" POV. I don't think people currently expect their phones to be like their desk/laptop OS environments. You have a valid point that MS are being misleading with the naming convention, but again, user expectation probably doesn't lead to much in the way of true confusion here.

I've never owned a Mac (iPhones yes, Mac no), so I can't say with 100% certainty, but I'm pretty sure the experience on one is vastly different from the other. Android, true, has some cross-formfactor success, but from phone to desktop (Android to Linux) we're looking at a new app again, so I wouldn't think people, tech-savvy or not, will be confused too much.

I hope you don't take this as argumentative - I simply like using my Windows Phone 8 / 8.1 phone, more than I liked my iPhones, more than I enjoyed using my wife's Android phone. I did state, MS' marketing strategy is crap, no doubt. I have shunned Windows 8 for the desktop so far, though I've had co-workers tell me it's fine, they just chuck the "Metro" side of things (in which case... it's Win 7 again with a few enhancements).

MS is doing so little on the consumer side right these days, let's highlight what they get right (competition drives innovation, right?) and encourage people to at least consider it as a viable option for their choice of mobile phone.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[njnnja]

I've never owned a Mac (iPhones yes, Mac no), so I can't say with 100% certainty, but I'm pretty sure the experience on one is vastly different from the other.

Part of that expectation comes from the fact that the operating system of the Mac is named "OS X" and the operating system on the phone/tablets is named "iOS". If they named the iPhone OS "OS X" there probably would be confusion.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[kilodelta]

In the United States it runs about 50% Android, 49% IOS and about 1% Windows Phone.

But if you look at worldwide statistics - Android accounts for over 80%.

And here's something I've noted about the average smart phone user. They have absolutely ZERO clue about some of the more fun things you can do with the phone. Like hosing all the google and Facebook apps from the phone. Or using it as a 4G wireless hotspot. And in many instances browsing the web or installing an alternative web browser (I use Chrome on my Android phone).

In essence P.T. Barnum was right, there's one born every minute.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Osgeld]

fud = fear, uncertainty and doubt, none of which are contained in my (smartass snarky) post

but thanks for playing the slashdot buzzword game, even though you lost

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[ericloewe]

Claiming "there weren't any" amounts to the spreading of FUD.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[lgw]

Only children care about looking grown-up and sophisticated. Sure, they aren't exactly fashionable, but Apple already makes the overpriced fashion accessory and there's not really room for another in that space (well, maybe in a generation or so).

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[MooseMiester]

Try to develop something on Windows Phone and you might not be so quick to flame the poster's attempt at humor.

The Windows Phone browser is a JOKE. Runs out of memory on most websites in short order. As a lot of mobile apps are mobile wrappers around existing HTML content this is a real deal killer. If they would fix the browser it would be a really slick platform, tiles really work for me on a phone, and the presentation is slick, slick, slick. And yes, I have everything here, iPhones, iPads, Andriod, Galaxy phones & Tablets, Windows, Ubuntu, and Macs. We're a dev house.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[ericloewe]

So, why have I, in real-world usage, never encountered this mythical memory shortage?

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[MooseMiester]

Try this:

Goto www.yachtworld.com

Do a search that returns 30,40 results check Show Details and watch it crash.

That's an easy one. We ended up optimizing the customer's website... reducing all the images to the bare minimum... just to keep the app running long enough for us to get paid. Our app took RSS article feed content, wrappered in a Metro style UI, and displayed it.

Every other Windows Phone developer I have talked to has had the same, exact experience.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[ericloewe]

Seems to work fine. Default is the mobile site, desktop site puts me back on the mobile site when clicking "details", but works fine nonetheless.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[MooseMiester]

Seems that Yachtworld has a mobile version. Sorry. I was looking for a site that wouldn't give away anybody as I wouldn't want my client reading anything bad about their app.

I understand you love you're Windows Phone and you think I'm trying to bash it. I'm not. We lost our asses building an app for the thing - for a large well known client - because the browser doesn't have enough memory. Last time I tried I could crash it pretty quickly on non mobile optimized websites. I listened to my staff cry for weeks about the thing.

The Surface is a different story, we've written a couple of apps for that and other than the fact that it lies about the screen resolution, it rocks. No, it's not an iPad AIR but the iPad AIR doesn't run Windows :-)

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Osgeld]

wow making a smart ass joke made you FEAR for the lack of apps?

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[ericloewe]

For what it's worth, other than typical mobile browser issues, IE on Windows Phone 8.1 (and 8 to a lesser extent) works fine with every site I've tried.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[ericloewe]

It doesn't make *me* fear. I know better.

It does scare other people away from the platform, which is bad for everyone (except Apple and Google).

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[david_thornley]

Last time I compared the two, across the corridor in a mall, the biggest difference was that the Apple store was hopping and the Windows store was dead. Next biggest difference was that the Apple store was bright and cheerful-looking and attractive. Microsoft is horrible at marketing.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Art3x]

So as the ultimate hipster, I will use desktop Linux and Windows Phone.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[sillybilly]

All I can find as a definition is http://www.wordreference.com/d...

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[PopeRatzo]

And here's something I've noted about the average smart phone user. They have absolutely ZERO clue about some of the more fun things you can do with the phone. Like hosing all the google and Facebook apps from the phone.

I can think of dozens of things I can do with my phone that are more fun than deleting all the Google and Facebook app. Problem is, most of them involve taking photos of my penis, and for some reason, people seem to frown upon that. At least according to the reactions I've gotten from several dozen ladies. However, I did receive one marriage proposal, but he won't be getting out of prison until 2017.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Shirley Marquez]

Part of the problem may be the lack of memory in many Windows Phone models. The popular Lumia 520, for example, has a measly 512MB, and even the new Lumia 630 is hobbled by that same small amount of RAM. In contrast, nearly every Android phone has at least 1GB now, with high end phones having 2GB or 3GB.

The browser on an old Android phone with 512MB will also choke quickly. It's true that the iPhone 4 and 4s only have 512MB (the iPhone 5 and later have 1GB), but they also have an OS that is somewhat more memory-efficient and that doesn't do true multitasking - well, it didn't until iOS 7 and people have been disappointed with the performance of that on older iPhones.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Shirley Marquez]

The Microsoft Stores I have visited don't look all that much like Apple Stores, but they did copy a lot of other things. One is that all the computers are set up so you can actually try them out; they have network connections and are logged in on accounts that aren't locked down, so you can even download applications and try the computers out with your favorite software. And the sales people are low pressure, perhaps because they are paid a flat salary rather than commissions, just like Apple.

But why shouldn't Microsoft adopt those things? Apple has shown that they work. And Microsoft wanted to create a different environment than the other stores selling their products are offering.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[Shirley Marquez]

The one Microsoft store that I have visited more than once (Prudential Center in Boston) always seems to be busy. I've never seen crazy crowds like the Apple Store gets on launch days, but I didn't go there the day the Xbox One came out. One factor is that they only do anything special for the launches of Microsoft's own products (the Surface and XBox lines), not for any of the laptops made by other manufacturers that they sell.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[bingoUV]

1. It's the user's choice isn't it? Say user uses the browser for some website already, and for him, opening lots of tabs on mobile browsers isn't very convenient. Website wrapping apps while not terribly indispensable, are surely of positive value. Website owner also might find it easier to write, test and guarantee better experience on apps as compared to 10 kinds of mobile browsers, 3 main engines and subtle variations in WebKit engine.

2. In-app purchases are declared upfront. Garbage? User decides, not you.

3. Fair point. This can be generalized to bad search feature in both Apple and Google stores. Inexplicable, horrible, deliberately non-useful search functionality. But being deliberate, apple and google surely see some value in this madness which I fail to see, so I'm not sure it will help them if they improve their search.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[tigersha]

You are joking, right? Lumias a pretty nice phones actually

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[KevReedUK]

Well, this.

"No, sir, this is the windows, that doesn't run windows apps. Well, I mean it does, but only the new, Metro, I meant Modern Interface (or whatever MS rebrands their interface to this time). To run old windows apps you'll need a different kind of windows."

I guess someone at MS thought that after using FUD on Linux and seeing it's success they should try go and FUD themselves in hopes of having the same effect.

Except this is not truly a Microsoft or Windows issue, it's largely an architecture issue, and won't be solved unless they decide to drop RT (and thereby ARM support). Doing that would kill them in the smartphone arena, as the number of x86/ x86-64 CPU-based handsets is small enough to count on just one hand in most markets. It would also seriously disadvantage them in the tablet market, as the same dearth of x86-based devices exists here, too.

It has ever been thus. Compile for one architecture, and it will run fine on that, but not on others. Anyone here remember Windows NT on lpha? You could run applications compiled for it, but not those compiled for x86. The reverse was also true (no lpha-compiled apps on x86).

You cannot blame Microsoft for third-party developers compiling their apps only for the x86 architecture and therefore those apps not being available on/ compatible with the ARM-based installs of their OS.

If more developers of software for Windows ported / cross-compiled their apps for both the x86-based (let's use the terminology you seem to be hinting at and call it "Full Windows") and the ARM-based (Windows RT) platforms, this discussion would not be happening.

I would agree that they could do a better job of differentiating Windows RT based devices from x86-based Windows devices to make it more immediately apparent to end users, but is that not ultimately the hardware vendors responsibility (except where Microsoft/Nokia is the hardware manufacturer, too)?

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[KevReedUK]

The name "windows phone" was hard enough to google for without a lot of noise, "lumia" is super easy to search on, but just "Windows" will make searching the web for windows-phone specific information essentially impossible.

Product names that are so generic that you can't easily search on them piss me off. Don't these companies know how the internet works?

Would I be safe in guessing that you didn't include the quotes when you put it in the Google search bar/box? Have you considered whether this might be your problem, not Microsoft's? Or are you suggesting that Google should perhaps automatically assume that when Windows and Phone appear side by side in search terms, they should enclose them in a set of quotes and combine them as a search phrase invisibly/dynamically, but not do the same for other comparable two-word combinations?

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[exomondo]

The most common smartphone in the world is the iPhone!

If that is untrue then I'm happy to be corrected, but "Flamebait"? Really?

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[exomondo]

Even if Linux had a compelling and disruptive element, it wouldn't convince business to leave MS's demented ecosystem.

Well it really depends on what it is, it's not really a Linux thing but something for the distro makers to come up with. The iPhone was very disruptive to the smartphone market and convinced big business to ditch their Windows Mobile and Blackberry devices in favor of it.

Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too

[praxis]

But why shouldn't Microsoft adopt those things? Apple has shown that they work. And Microsoft wanted to create a different environment than the other stores selling their products are offering.

Exactly! I don't disagree. The thread then devolved by a misunderstanding by AC "Because selling software in an online market place is clearly all invented by Apple". The entire topic has been retail stores, not online App Stores. Then ormico chimed in with "Because Apple invented selling products in physical stores?"

Ormico: they did not invent it but they did improve it. Revenue per square meter is a good metric of that. It makes sense to study what it is that they did to achieve that and have other business learn from it.

Good decision?

[dontbemad]

It feels like they're trying to beat Apple to the punch with this huge multi-platform OS merge, but I can't imagine that anyone will really enjoy this. It has been clear that one of the bigger upsets in recent history involving Windows was the "seamless merging" of a tablet and desktop OS experience, so why would they continue this obviously damaging trend?

Re:Good decision?

[ColdWetDog]

No, this is just Microsoft's Marketing Move of The Month. They change marketing strategies faster than Miley Cyrus changes clothes.

Re:Good decision?

[KiloByte]

You mean, they're usually without a real strategy?

Re:Good decision?

[shaitand]

Hardly, they are trying to catch up with Linux which is already literally one OS running and holding a strong footprint on all these things. Of course Linux runs on platforms both smaller and larger than any form of Windows.

Re:Good decision?

[praxis]

You have some large machines with your five-foot touch-only device and twenty-seven-foot desktop with Metro. Also, didn't Microsoft rename Metro as Modern-Style User Interface?

Re:Good decision?

[ericloewe]

Saying there's any kind of unification is absurd. Tons of sometimes somewhat compatible products use versions of the same kernel and the same CLI toolset.

Re:Good decision?

[bigfinger76]

This is not innovation. It's more of a repeated failure at rebranding.

Re:Good decision?

[macs4all]

Hardly, they are trying to catch up with Linux which is already literally one OS running and holding a strong footprint on all these things. Of course Linux runs on platforms both smaller and larger than any form of Windows.

You're joking, right?

Even Linux fans acknowledge that there is anything but "literally one" Linux. In fact, that's either one of its biggest drawbacks or one of its greatest strengths (or both, somehow)...

Or are you new here?

Re:Good decision?

[macs4all]

Because unlike the neck beards, MS is innovating. Why does a view (desktop, tablet, phone) have to be tied to the OS?

For certain activities, it doesn't (and usually isn't in any reasonably-modern OS). However, at some point, the UI "becomes" the driving factor in the OS (and Application) design, and when that is ignored, you get the clusterfuck that is The Interface Formerly Known As Metro.

Re:Good decision?

[Threni]

I'd love it if Linux was something Windows was trying to catch up with, but I'm afraid it's not even a grey cloud on the horizon as far as microsoft is concerned. If only it WAS one OS, supported by everyone from Dell to Oracle, it would wipe the floor with windows, but as long as there are 10 windows managers and 2000 distributions it'll never, ever happen.

Re:Good decision?

[macs4all]

MS could have been wise about the whole situation and looked to GNOME and Unity as some attempts at putting a touch screen orientated interface on a desktop environment and the uproar it caused. I am not sure how Microsoft thought they would have any different results. And I think MS is trying to beat Apple to unifying their operating systems; they want to look original when they finish first even though they didn't start first.

Yeah, but you'll notice that Apple is VERY selective about "unifying" the Desktop (pointer-driven) and Tablet/Phone (touch-driven) environments. And I am sure that they have been even MORE selective after seeing the adoption rate of Windows 8...

Re:Good decision?

[John Bokma]

It has been my understanding that Apple will keep OSX and iOS separate but for features that make sense to be on both. I don't expect a iMac Touch or Macbook Touch soon, but maybe I am wrong.

Re:Good decision?

[tepples]

Are you instaling on 5'? So, by default, I will not give you desktop, and you have a touch only.

So what do I get when I plug a phone into an external HDMI monitor? I have 5" and 24".

Re: Good decision?

[LostMyBeaver]

Why not have all platforms on all devices and if I use a wireless thin client to dock a phone which is in my pocket and get a desktop. Add a wireless charger to the chair and I can leave the phone in my pocket. Add hands free speakerphone to the desktop or phone and messaging control to the task bar with caller ID notifications and I can use a Bluetooth hands free.

Make a wide variety of laptop style thin clients which can be docked with or without wires to the phone. Then you can mix and match. The device can last you 5 generations of phones.

There are many things which can be done like this. Intel processors for phones are more powerful than what I had in my laptop 4 years ago. Add enough RAM and enough storage and your phone can completely replace your laptop and desktop CPUs.

There are just an amazing number of options like this. Funny thing is, with technology of Linux like X and Wayland, if there was a desktop which didn't suck and apps which didn't suck for Linux, it could have done this years ago.

Re:Good decision?

[Barlo_Mung_42]

I think they're already ahead of Apple with they're universal apps. It's nice that if I pay for an app for my phone I get it for Win8 too. iOS and OSX still seem a long ways apart in many ways.

Re:Good decision?

[exomondo]

So what do I get when I plug a phone into an external HDMI monitor? I have 5" and 24".

Well the practicality mostly depends on the control input, not the output device. A desktop is pretty much never practical on a 5" screen regardless of the input mechanism but on a 10" screen with a keyboard connected it would be. A 5" device outputting to an external screen with a mouse and keyboard attached could obviously support desktop usage.

Re:Good decision?

[Bing Tsher E]

There's only one true Window Manager (Tab Window Manager) TWM but there are a lot of pretenders, too.

Tab is well documented in the O'Reilly X manual set.

Re:Good decision?

[Bing Tsher E]

When you have a relatively small customer base and are highly restrictive about what hardware your OS will run on, you have a lot of freedom to be very VERY controlling of your environment. Apple nearly died in the period when they allowed their OS to run on third party hardware. But they could never scale up with only their own hardware. We don't need a ubiquitous Winston Smith viewscreen common to everyone, either. Diversity is good.

Re:Good decision?

[I'm New Around Here]

Oh come on. Even I know what you are saying.

Re: Good decision?

[macs4all]

Now that's funny!!!

Re: Good decision?

[macs4all]

When you have a relatively small customer base and are highly restrictive about what hardware your OS will run on, you have a lot of freedom to be very VERY controlling of your environment.

Seriously?

Within a very large "set" of possible motherboards, video cards, etc, What possible bearing would the range of a certain class of hardware that an OS can run on have to do with whether that OS uses featureless, monochromatic "tiles" that look like they were designed by a six-year-old (but which are running on a GPU that can crank out 25 zillion individually shaded and textured polygons per second), and which barely knows how to do an overlapping window, let alone multiple desktops, as opposed to an UI that actually looks like it was designed by someone who not only implemented easy-to-use features to compensate for systems with limited screen real-estate, while taking full advantage of systems with multiple displays? (Yes, I am fully aware that other OSes have supported things like multiple desktops for some time; but this is about Windows "Modern UI" vs. OS X).

So obviously, it isn't the tightly-spec'ed hardware (since what Apple is doing could be handled by any competent GPU designed in this century) (trackpad gestures notwithstanding). So maybe, just maybe, it is something else, eh?

Re: Good decision?

[bingoUV]

So obviously, it isn't the tightly-spec'ed hardware (since what Apple is doing could be handled by any competent GPU designed in this century)

Well, (both) the competent GPU makers suck so hard at driver writing, that black holes have developed an inferiority complex. So on top of a competent GPU, one needs a competent GPU writer, or at least hold the hands of GPU makers in writing drivers for an OS and/or test the drivers beyond imagination.

Apple is doing that well with their limited GPUs supported. But as a general statement it is completely not true that a competent GPU is capable of doing something on its own.

Re: Good decision?

[macs4all]

So obviously, it isn't the tightly-spec'ed hardware (since what Apple is doing could be handled by any competent GPU designed in this century)

Well, (both) the competent GPU makers suck so hard at driver writing, that black holes have developed an inferiority complex. So on top of a competent GPU, one needs a competent GPU writer, or at least hold the hands of GPU makers in writing drivers for an OS and/or test the drivers beyond imagination.

Apple is doing that well with their limited GPUs supported. But as a general statement it is completely not true that a competent GPU is capable of doing something on its own.

Actually, I wasn't actually talking about the GPU-drivers, or their authors (except to attempt to make the point that OS X's advanced use of the WIMP UI (as compared with Windows 8) is not "rocket-science", GPU (or GPU-driver) wise; but rather the authors of the OS (as embodied by their employer, i.e. Microsoft or Apple) are the "Rocket-Scientists" here. Because it is the OS that contains the functions and functionality that enable all that cool (and useful!) Window and "Multiple-Desktops"-Management in OS X, that makes Windows 8 look and feel so downright antediluvian by comparison.

So, what I was saying to the GGP was that "This has NOTHING to do with 'Restricted Hardware' choices (because any number of readily-available hardware combinations could easily handle the task), and EVERYTHING to do with OS Designers and Developers, and their ability to solve the UI challenges in an elegant, easy-to-use way."

Re: Good decision?

[bingoUV]

OK, that is fine, I'm not sure you read "But as a general statement it is completely not true that a competent GPU is capable of doing something on its own."

So if you didn't talk about GPU drivers, you are missing something important.

Re: Good decision?

[macs4all]

OK, that is fine, I'm not sure you read "But as a general statement it is completely not true that a competent GPU is capable of doing something on its own."

So if you didn't talk about GPU drivers, you are missing something important.

No. I just assumed that anyone reading and posting on Slashdot understood that in both cases (Windows 8's "Whatever-Replaced-Aero-Glass"', and "OS X's "Quartz Compositor" (or whatever it is called these days)) that the difference between using those APIs (and the lower-level drivers and hardware) to acheive either the Windows 8 "Modern UI" or OS X's "Window and Desktop(s) Management" could not be attributed to having "tightly controlled" Hardware selection (in Apple's case), vs. "Anything Goes" hardware selection (leaving the Windows Approved Hardware List out of it for the moment), because, in each case, the actual underlying hardware and software was almost assuredly capable of presenting essentially the same complexity of display, and that the REAL difference was that Microsoft simply (and IMHO, wrongly) thinks their primitive UI is what "the people" actually want and need (but which "the people" have simply and roundly rejected, as referenced by W8's frighteningly-low adoption rate)..

Re:Good decision?

[WuphonsReach]

There's really only three Linux distros... Red Hat, Debian, everyone else.

Which is somewhat similar to the days where you had Windows 95/98 vs Windows NT - and you couldn't always run software from one on the other.

And really, once you get past the package manager, most of the differences between the distros are only skin-deep. It's all GNU/Linux underneath.

Re: Good decision?

[bingoUV]

OK, so

1. Microsoft made a decision - to use "primitive" graphics.

2. They have a business model where they need to support a wide variety of graphics chips.

You are saying 1 was surely not caused by the driver insanity resulting from 2. Based on what?

Re: Good decision?

[macs4all]

OK, so

1. Microsoft made a decision - to use "primitive" graphics.

2. They have a business model where they need to support a wide variety of graphics chips.

You are saying 1 was surely not caused by the driver insanity resulting from 2. Based on what?

Jeebus! Are you just TRYING to be obtuse; or do you REALLY have a mental defect?

Based on the fact that you can't FIND a "desktop"-Class GPU, that couldn't do stuff like Apple is doing with Mission Control and Spaces, and even at least support for two monitors.

And are you REALLY here to DEFEND Windows "Modern UI", or just argue against me?

Re: Good decision?

[bingoUV]

Every argument is not about defending at attacking windows UI. This one is against your misconception about GPUs being sentient beings.

So you've still not read, or understood the statement I repeated in my last post. GPU doesn't do anything on its own. It needs a driver. Lacking a driver, you cannot find a GPU, any class, that can draw a single triangle.

Re: Good decision?

[macs4all]

Every argument is not about defending at attacking windows UI. This one is against your misconception about GPUs being sentient beings.

So you've still not read, or understood the statement I repeated in my last post. GPU doesn't do anything on its own. It needs a driver. Lacking a driver, you cannot find a GPU, any class, that can draw a single triangle.

No fooling? With over 30 years of embedded dev. experience, I never would have thought of that! (rolls eyes)

But what I have been trying to get through everyone's collectively addled brains is this:

The excuse that "Windows' 'Moderrn UI' has to be "simple", because they have to work with a wider-range of (Desktop-Class) GPU hardware" is patently absurd, due to the fact that the Windows' software engineers (OS and Driver Devs.) should be able to code an interface with as much "UI-finesse" as what is available in OS X (which is undeniably more "advanced" than the Windows 'Modern UI'), using any reasonable "Desktop-Class" GPU.

I do believe, however, that the main reason that MS decided to make "Metro" so bog-simple (no "shading", no "textures" and no "overlapping windows"), was because they wanted (which is way different than "had to" ) come up with an interface that wouldn't tax the capabilities of Phone and Tablet-Class GPU hardware.

IOW, whereas Apple wisely matched the UI of OS X and iOS more closely to the TYPICAL "Class of Devices" that they were running on (Desktop vx. Mobile), MS just "raced to the bottom" with "Metro", and forced all their "Desktop" users to unnecessarily suffer from a "Lowest-Common-Denominator" UI.

In short: Microsoft took the lazy way out, and then tried to pass it off as a "Unified" UI design.

Re: Good decision?

[bingoUV]

Without taking any blame off Microsoft, I'd like to argue that while you boast of so many years of embedded development and understanding that GPUs don't do anything without drivers; when you make your argument it still comes off like you don't understand that.

Microsoft CANNOT develop drivers of any respectable GPUs without enormous help from Nvidia or AMD. And they don't even try, in any significant way, other than supporting graphics companies. They could have tested and released lists of supported GPUs if the list were small, like Apple's. It's not so they can't, not without 200 times as much effort as Apple which they are unwilling to invest. Probably they should, but you can't pretend they don't have orders of magnitude more work to do in this area than Apple, precisely because of hardware variety. That much is just for graphics.

Re:Good decision?

[shaitand]

There are plenty of distributions sure but they are all built on the linux os. Code written on one runs on the others unless you build in high level dependencies. Being fluent in administrating one means you can administrate the others (unless you bought in to distro specific tool kool-aid).

Brilliant!

[jtownatpunk.net]

Since there's so much confusion about the differences between RT, Phone, and desktop versions of our OS, let's just call them all by the same name. That will simplify things. Worked for Admiral General Aladeen.

Re:Brilliant!

[i kan reed]

I can't think of a thing microsoft has done in the past few years that aren't one of these:
A. Restructuring their corporation
B. Rebranding an existing product(so many times)
C. Ripping off another company's consumer tech while being years too late to the party.

Re:Brilliant!

[msauve]

"Worked for Admiral General Aladeen."

ITYM General Protection Fault?

Re:Brilliant!

[steelfood]

I can:

D. Making overpriced acquisitions that go nowhere, and then writing the purchase off as a loss.
E. Squandering potential opportunities via mismanagement and half-assed commitment.
F. Spending a ton of money on marketing to make people think their shit is actually gold.

Re:Brilliant!

[mcrbids]

You don't know Microsoft very well, then. They've literally never done anything else!

1) They were late to the party with DOS. They ripped off QDOS and sold it to IBM. It was IBM who launched Microsoft, it was Microsoft's non-exclusive contract with IBM that allowed the IBM compatible market to begin. That had never been done before, and only happened because IBM didn't take the microcomputer seriously.

2) They were late to the party for GUI. Windows was quickly thrown together after trying to work together with IBM and deciding to be dicks to IBM and steal lots of their design work.

3) Windows '95 was a rebrand of "Windows". So was Windows CE ME NT, XP, Vista, Mobile, and RT. In a sense, Windows 7 is the first "debranding" of Windows back to its marketing roots.

4) Microsoft goes through a major change in structure every 2-5 years. It's always made the tech rags, all the way back to the 1980s.

5) Their now dominant office was a rebrand of their MS Word, Excel, and Power Point, which were sold separately.

6) Each of these Office products was a late comer in its field, in part winning due to strange incompatibilities encountered by the "other guys". Remember the phrase "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run". Lotus 123 was the leading spreadsheet at the time.

and so on.... Just don't pretend that this BS is anything *new*. Market conditions were right, and MS had a combination of luck and determination to make the best of it. The market conditions have changed remarkably.

Re:Brilliant!

[Bing Tsher E]

I wouldn't say Microsoft was 'late to the party with DOS.' There was basically CP/M and lots of little stuff out there. They bought one of the 'little stuff OSes' because they had IBM as a customer and the opportunity to be in charge of the Next Big Thing DOS.

Windows prior to Windows 95 was based on the same GUI standard as OSF/Motif.

Lotus 123 was a latecomer. Visicalc was the breakthrough spreadsheet from the spreadsheet inventor, and ran on the Apple 2 and the IBM PC (among others).

Microsoft is persistent. That sums it up. They'll produce a crappy product if they need a placeholder in a new market. Sometimes they later abandon that market. Other times they succeed.

Re:Brilliant!

[dingleberrie]

You're not trying.
I'm not even a fan of microsoft, but I read slashdot, and I've seen stuff I respect:
* Pushing an innovative and amazing peripheral into the consumer space with XBOX One kinect (Privacy issues and untrustability make this undesirable, but the techology is awesome, and the price is awesomer).
* Rewriting their windows infrastructure so that it boots in 5 seconds, runs well on a tablet and is still compatible with, you know, Windows.
* They beat apple and android to the flat design race. I don't like the look, but it came first, which is the opposite of point C.
* Putting an infrastructure in place to merge the PC, tablet, and phone when the time is right. Maybe this ain't that time, but it's not because of a technological limitation.
* Showing that even a huge company with a long company cultural history can revise and improve SW design processes to move from monolithic releases to rapid releases.

Now I could also release a list of things I don't like, as I could with any company, but there is some major innovation going on at Microsoft now that they have competition.

Re:Brilliant!

[david_thornley]

Merging PC, tablet, and phone is stupid. I could argue that it's a technological limitation, but really it's a matter of different form factors.

My phone is something I hold in one hand and use a small touch screen. A tablet is larger, may or may not be usable while holding with one hand, and can be efficiently used with a Bluetooth keyboard (which Microsoft did not invent). A PC is usually larger yet, and does come with keyboard and mouse.

With the exception of things like calculators, a UI needs to be thoroughly redesigned between running on a phone and running on a PC. This at least doubles UI design time, and requires different code. An app running on a PC can have superfluous UIs in it, but phones are much tighter. Therefore, it's usually a bad idea to use the same app on all three.

Now, if the phone were able to project a 21" holographic display, and provide the equivalent functionality of keyboard and mouse, that would make unified apps practical, so I suppose the problem is technically a technological limitation.

Too late ...

[CaptainDork]

Microsoft is too late to the phone party.

That space has been up and running for a LONG time and the competitors have too big a lead.

Re:Too late ...

[DaHat]

I'm sure Blackberry used to say the same about the various upstarts that tried to dethrown them... and we know how well that worked out.

Re: Too late ...

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

Microsoft was the first one to the party. It's lunch got eaten by blackberry. Then blackberry got it's tail handed to it by apple and android. Hit is it going to compete?

Re:Too late ...

[lister king of smeg]

I'm sure Blackberry used to say the same about the various upstarts that tried to dethrown them... and we know how well that worked out.

Blackberry sat on its laurels and didn't try to innovate or court the consumer market instead aiming to the corporate market which was killed by the popularization of the Bring.Your.Own.Device policy.

Re: Too late ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Nokia had the first smartphone: the Nokia Communicator in 1996. The first of Microsoft's own phones were running Windows Mobile 2002, so were at least 6 years later.

Nobody cares who had the first smartphone, the point he is making is that Microsoft had the first widely popular smartphone platform and that is correct, then Blackberry took over, then Apple took over that and now Android has taken over Apple.

(and yes before you get all excited and bent out of shape I know from your posting history that you're a huge apple fan and yes apple does still have appreciable market share, yes they have the most popular single device and yes they are profitable the point is simply that their platform is not the most popular)

Re: Too late ...

[Bing Tsher E]

By being better. Which is something you have to work at. Microsoft is a company filled with persistent bastards who have proven they can eventually Get It Done successfully. They've done so in several markets recently. I don't particularly like Microsoft and my phone and tablets at present are Android. But I'd like them to be better, and Microsoft could be the ones to produce that 'better.' If for no other reason, because they don't have the long-tail legacy that Android is starting to carry.

Re:Too late ...

[symbolset]

At one point Windows Mobile had 43% smartphone market share. They threw it away.

Re:Too late ...

[tehlinux]

Tell that to twitch.tv.

Re: Too late ...

[david_thornley]

Either you have to be first or you need an edge. I wouldn't call Microsoft's smartphone widely popular, as I never saw anybody using one. Blackberries were popular, but the iPhone had a big ease-of-use advantage as an edge. Android muscled in quite successfully, its main edges being the ability to sell at the low end where Apple doesn't go, and the ability to run on the phones of multiple manufacturers. Currently, Android has the numbers, Apple has a respectable market share and rakes in the most money, and everybody else is scrambling for survival.

Into this comes Microsoft, trying to sell a smartphone with a bad selection of apps and its own set of limitations. There's no obvious reason why anybody in particular should get a Windows phone, although it will doubtless appeal to some anyway, or fill some niche need Apple and Android don't. Microsoft has several possible strategies, none inviting. The idea of forcing the WP interface down everybody's throat, to get them used to it and to get more apps written, backfired badly. Microsoft could try shutting Android and Apple out of their administration software, but that has its own set of risks, and would at best get them a bigger niche. Besides, they've already been putting versions of Office on Android and iOS. They can allow the running of Android apps, perhaps, but that kills the idea of getting people to write apps for Windows phones, since they can write for Android and hit both platforms. The Surface Pro was an interesting idea, but Microsoft marketed it horribly, including getting it confused with the less capable Surface, and advertising the heck out of attachable keyboards as a distinguishing feature (it isn't) and charging well over $100 in addition to the Surface/Surface Pro for them.

Reduce name, Increase confusion

[klek]

As if MSware were not obfuscated and confusing enough. Now people won't know if you are talking about a PC with Windows installed, or your WinPho.

On the other hand, WindowsPhones will never get significant enough market share to really be that relevant to most of us techies, so it prolly won't matter.

Unified Kernel

[GeoffSmith1981]

Makes sense considering the plan to unify the kernel and APIs.

Re:Unified Kernel

[ericloewe]

The kernel IS unified. They're literally using the same kernel across all devices since Windows 8 and equivalents. APIs are already optionally unified.

The real last step is getting the WinRT APIs and environments up to snuff so they can be seamlessly used alongside Win32 applications on the desktop. That and providing incentives for applications to be written to universal standards, instead of just for tablet or phone (or desktop, once store apps become viable on the desktop).

Re:Unified Kernel

[macs4all]

The kernel IS unified. They're literally using the same kernel across all devices since Windows 8 and equivalents. APIs are already optionally unified.

R U Serious?

Are you REALLY saying that a PHONE is running a full-blown NT Kernel?!?

That's actually pretty impressive. But dumb.

Re:Unified Kernel

[Anonymous Coward]

yes

Re:Unified Kernel

[ericloewe]

All versions of Windows are now based on Windows NT. That's why WP7 users didn't get an update to WP8 - every single driver would've needed a rewrite.

I wouldn't call it dumb - the tiny gains related to a custom kernel are far outweighed by the many advantages of commonality, like easy hardware support (one driver is enough for all Windows devices) and easy API portability.

Re:Unified Kernel

[Joe_Dragon]

the new API needs to be not locked to store only and side loading does not count

Re:Unified Kernel

[awshidahak]

So does this make Windows CE officially completely dead?

Re:Unified Kernel

[exomondo]

The issue with NT's kernel isn't that it's huge, it's that it's bloated.

If you're not talking about size the what do you mean by "bloated"?

Re:Unified Kernel

[Kultiras]

Not quite. It was renamed Windows Embedded Compact after CE 5.0. Versions 6, 7, and 2013 are still supported products; the latter until 2023. Windows Embedded Automotive is also based off of Embedded Compact.

Re:Unified Kernel

[MachineShedFred]

Nope. There's still plenty of embedded devices and ruggedized devices for logistics that are running Windows Mobile / Windows Embedded.

Re:Unified Kernel

[4pins]

The real last step is getting the WinRT APIs and environments up to snuff so they can be seamlessly used alongside Win32 applications on the desktop.

You mean like this?

I am no fan of Windows 8, however it biggest problem is its face not its core or its capabilities. Compared to a few years ago (when the: common, random, and jarring full screen interruption was a blue screen of death), this is the world upside down.

Re:Unified Kernel

[ericloewe]

Well, Windows 9 seems to officially finally do what 8 should've done from the beginning.

At least Vista was feature-complete, instead of a half-assed attempt that everyone realized needed more polish ASAP.

Re:Unified Kernel

[tigersha]

Why is it dumb? A modern phone has a better CPU than the first CPUs that was running Windows NT Kernel. an iPad 4 is faster than a Cray X/MP!

Re:Unified Kernel

[KevReedUK]

The issue with NT's kernel isn't that it's huge, it's that it's bloated.

If you're not talking about size the what do you mean by "bloated"?

I think the point he was trying to make was:

Large and useful != bad thing

Large and mostly full of useless crap = bad thing

Re:Unified Kernel

[exomondo]

Perhaps, but these days it isn't large. At the time of Windows 7's release Minwin - which is not just a kernel - was less than 40mb (it may even be less than 30mb now).

What a great move!

[gamorck]

...because Windows is such a well loved brand!

Re:What a great move!

[lister king of smeg]

...because Windows is such a well loved brand!

What will consumers think of when they get to the cellphone store. Do you want the phone made by Apple (immediately associated with status) Google (the guys that make the internets in the mind of joe sixpack) or Windows (immediately think of the blue-screen or "this program has just performed an illegal operation dialog [translated you just lost three hours of work on the project the boss wants dialog]").

Which is the consumer going to pick social status symbol, gift of the internet gods, or the product associated with frustration and fail?

Re:What a great move!

[neoritter]

Do I want a phone by Apple, that's overpriced and does the same thing as its competitors. Google, the guys that want to learn every facet of my life so they can profit off me. Windows, the company that has been making computers that works for the past two decades, and has to deal with the crud that goes wrong that isn't actually their fault; oh and the crowds of people that scream, "omg! I don't have a start button!! What is I to do?!?!?!"

Re:What a great move!

[david_thornley]

You're taking a viewpoint most people don't have. Most people don't think of Apple or Google or Microsoft the way you do. I'm not saying you're wrong, but you're unusual, and it's hardly worth a smartphone maker marketing to somebody like you.

Abject brand mismanagement

[mbkennel]

Microsoft has not ever understood one thing.

People ***HATE*** "Windows". Windows is associated with work, pain, crazy difficulties, nerds and viruses. The brand name has negative value.

So what does Microsoft do? They double and triple down on fucking *Windows*. They had the opportunity with the Metro to finally make people see Microsoft as going beyond Windows. "No this isn't Windows any more, it's not supposed to be Windows, and that's OK. We're more than Windows, so try it on its own terms".

And now with phones they kill the one name, Nokia, which people did have a good association with, in favor of a nothingburger which might as well be a suppository name.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[Anonymous Coward]

And now they're calling a bunch of different and incompatible things all the same. And now the rest of us have to explain to clients everyday that even if it runs "Windows", it can't actually run software written for Windows, much like we did for Windows RT, except that the name is even more confusing now.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[Anonymous Coward]

People do not "hate" Windows, they "use" Windows. Metro was a backstep from that usefulness. You are out of your depth and full of shit.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[Threni]

Should have called it Surface, and advertised/marketed cool shiny tablets, laptops and phones using Surface. The next version of Windows should be called Surface. They should hide windows (small w) on any promotional stuff (yes, us nerds know it's there so we can get work done on Visual Studio etc) but regular users do indeed hate Windows.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[asmkm22]

I like Windows. (I also happen to like Linux). My clients all prefer Windows when it comes to PC's, except for a select few who are Apple fans. Most people I deal with, though (200-300), have no problem with it. I know it used to be trendy to hate microsoft and all that, but these days it seems very few people really care about brand identity, other than the REALLY hardcore fans.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[c]

People ***HATE*** "Windows". Windows is associated with work, pain, crazy difficulties, nerds and viruses. The brand name has negative value.

True. But it still gets more respect than "Windows Phone".

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[DogDude]

Windows is associated with work, pain, crazy difficulties, nerds and viruses.

Huh? Most people I know associate Windows with easy and simple. Crazy difficulties and nerds is called "Linux".

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[Anonymous Coward]

People ***HATE*** "Windows". Windows is associated with work, pain, crazy difficulties, nerds and viruses. The brand name has negative value.

If you ignore half a billion relatively satisfied Windows 7 users, sure.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[Simulant]

Microsoft is trying to be Google and Apple at the same time and they will likely fail badly at both.
All because they can never stop growing....

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[Man On Pink Corner]

That was certainly Steve Ballmer's approach.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[HalAtWork]

Default Linux installs just work, Windows needs a lot of drivers, patching & reboots, and helper apps, to even be useful.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Default Linux installs just work...

There's no such thing as "default Linux".

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[Teresita]

I don't hate Windows. I saw the screenshots for Windows Nein on a German site today. Objectively, it should be called Windows 8.2 by the looks of it. So it's just something that bores me, not something to hate.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[_merlin]

It definitely doesn't just work if you need Japanese language support. You need to find the necessary packages, install them, configure ibus... Seriously it's a nightmare. On Windows or OSX you just choose it from the dropdown during installation. Every time I do a distro upgrade I have to go through this stupid pain-in-the-arse procedure again, trying to work out exactly which packages I need with no help from any documentation.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[Lunix Nutcase]

You seem to falsely assume that most Windows users actually install the OS themselves. In reality, they just use what is installed on the machine they bought.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[Bing Tsher E]

Base NetBSD installs just work, too. Actually as good or better than Linux. You just install the 300-500Megs that a base install consists of, then configure your network and X and install packages. And edit your ~/.twmrc file so everything is in the menu.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[Superdarion]

Drivers? The only drivers you'll ever need are graphics drivers, and that's only if you're a gamer; otherwise the default video drivers work just fine.

This is of course anecdotal, but on my computer every time I install win7 I need to go looking for video, sound and modem drivers to even make it behave like a modern computer (and I still can't believe Windows asks me if I want to search the internet for those modem drivers). Then I have to install a bunch of other minor drivers to get all the functions back. And this with a dell laptop that came with win7.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[bingoUV]

People associating windows with easy and simple are known as computer geniuses - top 5% of population in "computer genius" terms. For 95% people using computers, windows is associated with difficult.

Linux is associated with "what's that?". Ok, Linux is actually not associated with anything.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[thegarbz]

Qualify which versions of windows you're talking about. See it's not a case of being trendy but the Windows hate came with the specific product. Hating Windows ME, Vista, and Metro was not a trend. It's a constant. People haven't stopped hating it, they've stopped using it.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[Alioth]

Not only is does it have negative value in the phone marketing, it's confusing and disappoints people - they think because it's Windows it will have more compatibility with their PC and will run PC applications and then find "yes it's Windows but it doesn't run Windows apps". Apple didn't call the iPhone the Mac Phone for a reason (even though it reputedly runs the same OS kernel).

Microsoft would have been better off just calling it Metro instead of Windows. Or pretty much any other easy to pronounce name.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[hawkinspeter]

Patching windows is a real pain. What I don't understand is that you apply all the available updates and then after rebooting, you find that there's critical patches to fix the patches you just applied.

You can end up spending hours checking for updates, applying them, rebooting and then repeating it because your time is worthless to Microsoft. With Linux, when you apply the updates, you get all the updates at once and you only reboot if a new kernel was installed. A job that takes many hours on Windows takes maybe half an hour on Linux and doesn't require constant user attention.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[synapse7]

That is why most people are unable to update a windows 8 install. It is even a pain for me because I can't seem to push out some updates from WSUS and have to get these from the windows store, WTF. If there is a work around I haven't put out enough time to find it..

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[MachineShedFred]

Drivers? The only drivers you'll ever need are graphics drivers, and that's only if you're a gamer; otherwise the default video drivers work just fine.

Horseshit.

6 year old Dell desktop hardware, and Windows didn't have an audio driver that would drive the headphone jack. Had to get a reference driver from Realtek and deploy it to hundreds of machines so that our IP telephone project wasn't derailed by a completely shit default driver that absolutely DID NOT "work just fine."

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[MachineShedFred]

ignore half a billion relatively satisfied Windows 7 users

So, exactly what Microsoft did when they released Windows 8 / 8.1 / 8.1 "Spring Update" ?

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[HalAtWork]

That's been my experience. Meanwhile on Linux everything works out of the box, automatic updates take care of security patches, and I use a GUI to select whatever apps I want and they install just fine, but most of what I need is right there out of the box. Office, browser, music/photo software, video player, stuff to import/export from my phone and tablet, it's brilliant.

And it's all the software I'm used to from Windows, such as LibreOffice, VLC, Firefox, Chrome, Inkscape, Gimp, so there's no problems with relearning the apps or using the same files across any platform for me.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[HalAtWork]

Moot point when that can be the experience with any OS. When people get Linux machines from me, they're already set up as well.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[asmkm22]

These days the product is usually Windows 7. The thing is, it we're talking about Windows XP, we'll see a shit ton of people drawing lines in the sand ("It does what I need, so why change it!?") based on what amounts to outdated opinions and lack of understanding that what's *good enough* for them might not be for someone else. It's why I kind of have to take MS bashing with a grain of salt.

I honestly can't remember the last time I ran into an actual Windows problem that wasn't either the result of other programs (usually malware), or simply fixed with an "SFC /scannow" command. The problems I do run into, 9 times out of 10, are 3rd party issues. Stuff like contacts duplicating in Outlook and on their phone because iCloud and iTunes have sync issues when installed together. Or programs like Timberline, Lexus Nexus, or even Backup Exec, which manage to retain the same bugs and design problems over 5+ major versions.

As for Apple, I've come to the conclusion that their stuff is rock solid if you only use Apple products and solutions. The moment you step out of that garden, you're getting attacked by a gazebo.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[david_thornley]

Based on my very limited experience doing Linux and Windows installs, Linux is easier. I install Linux according to the directions, and it doesn't need me to hunt down drivers. When I want more functionality I get packages. Considerably simpler.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[thegarbz]

That's actually funny, you must be hanging out with a very different crowd. I don't see anyone hating on Windows 7 or Windows XP. Plenty of hate was directed at other products though, and plenty of hate is directed at specific apps.

This is certainly not a "trend" though. There are a few annoying things about Windows 7 which were better in XP, and there are in my opinion a few stupid people out there who think that a 13 year old operating system is using the system properly, they'll learn when they get an SSD drive or suddenly realise a typical application uses more than 3.5GB of RAM.

XP was great in its day. Windows 7 still is great. The in betweeners are a steaming turd which get the hate they rightfully deserve, and that's about consistent with what I see.

Re:Abject brand mismanagement

[_merlin]

Yeah, but very basic functionality like actually being able to type your name if you happen to be Japanese requires you to install the OS, then get a combination of strangely-named packages like ibus, im-chooser, anthy, some font packages, etc. and then screw around getting it configured. None of this is documented clearly. Windows or OSX lets you choose a language from a list at install time. Which do you think is easier?

Device drivers are another issue. Linux is simpler if there's a driver in the kernel tree and it works adequately. If there isn't, then it's far more trouble than Windows to find a driver and get it to work. Also, drivers often lack functionality on Linux. For example the Wacom tablet drivers aren't adequately configurable. There are some options in obscure text files that you need root to edit, but there's no simple way to switch mapping on-the-fly or reconfigure your buttons per application. This is all dead easy on OSX or Windows.

Linux may be easier for you, but there are far more use cases than "person with no exotic hardware speaking a language using Latin script".

Miley puts ON clothes?

[raymorris]

Miley CHANGES clothes? I thought she just took them off.

Re:Miley puts ON clothes?

[steelfood]

Unless she was born with clothes on, I'd say she had to have had put on clothes at least once in her life before she had any to take off. Somebody else putting it on her also counts.

Free branding advice for MSFT:

[Rob_Bryerton]

Free branding advice for MSFT; a variation on the classic formula:

1. Think of a brand name.
2. Does it contain the word "Windows"? If so, throw it away and go to step 1.
3. Does it contain the word "Microsoft"? If so, throw it away and go to step 1.
4. ???
5. Profit

Re:Free branding advice for MSFT:

[NoNonAlphaCharsHere]

Spot on. Like "Zune" for example...

Re:Free branding advice for MSFT:

[ZombieBraintrust]

Office Phone OS

A better idea...

[Rob_Bryerton]

Microsoft is killing off the "Windows Phone" name in favor of Windows.

I think this version would be more appealing:

Microsoft is killing off the "Windows Phone" name in favor of Phone.

Re:A better idea...

[SternisheFan]

Why not just go with "Windows iPhone"?

Yup. That sounds perfect.

[BLToday]

Yup. That sounds perfect. I'm going to change my phone number now because I don't want to get calls from my relatives about "How do I install the Sims I bought on DVD on my Lumia?" or "How do I get my copy of Word 2013 running on my phone? It says it's running Windows so it should work with my copy of Office 2013, right?"

I actually already got this one: "I bought Windows 8 to make my desktop (Windows 7) into a touchscreen but it's not working. The guy at the Microsoft Store said it would make my screen into a touchscreen." I was never sure if my relative misunderstood what the employee was saying or the employee at the MS Store actually told him that.

I switched to Android when the new OS was released

[Mr_Wisenheimer]

The old Windows CE based OS's were the most open devices on the market, but with the new OS, Microsoft has gone the Apple route, which is a shame.

The new Windows Phones are very friendly to the unsophisticated consumer, perhaps even more so than the iPhone, but they were so slow to react to the iPhone and lost so much market share that I'm not sure the product will ever be the success it once was.

That said, it is smart to integrate Windows RT and Windows Phone.

Their biggest challenge is to convince developers to actually release for this OS. They are far behind since deciding to kill off open development and switch to the iOS model of software sales.

idiotic

[slashmydots]

Let's test that. What's the weather like? Let me check my Windows. Hold on, I have to call someone on my Windows. She just texted my Windows. My Windows is ringing.
That works great.

Re:idiotic

[Anonymous Coward]

To be fair, I usually check my windows to see if it's raining.

captcha: therapy

They must be playing musical chairs quickly...

[dpbsmith]

These days Microsoft is changing their branding around faster than a huckster playing the shell game. No end-user knows what the implied promise of any of their brands is, and none of their brands are stable for long enough to figure out whether the implied promise is kept.

I'm guessing this is a reflection of inner turmoil, and that whenever some internal group gets a new manager, that manager gets to pick new names for everything.

Microsoft, like some other companies, doesn't quite get it that perception is only part of the reality, the reality is also part of the reality. You can't solve the problem of inconsistent user interfaces just by calling it all "Windows."

Microsoft vs Apple

[Just Some Guy]

Microsoft decides that it's in their best interest for all customers to use identical UIs, so they make Metro the standard interface on phones, video game systems, tablets, desktops, and servers. Apple decides that it's in their customers' best interest for products to have similar but individualized UIs, so they create tailored interfaces for tiny, small, and large displays.

That, in a nutshell, is the difference between the two companies (and why Apple is eating Microsoft's lunch in every category where they directly compete).

Re:Microsoft vs Apple

[asmkm22]

Windows had these problems long before they tried unifying their OS UI. Cute theory, but it misses the mark.

Re:Microsoft vs Apple

[macs4all]

Microsoft decides that it's in their best interest for all customers to use identical UIs, so they make Metro the standard interface on phones, video game systems, tablets, desktops, and servers. Apple decides that it's in their customers' best interest for products to have similar but individualized UIs, so they create tailored interfaces for tiny, small, and large displays.

That, in a nutshell, is the difference between the two companies (and why Apple is eating Microsoft's lunch in every category where they directly compete).

Exactly. Someone else, mod parent up, please!

Re:Microsoft vs Apple

[Just Some Guy]

Microsoft's hardware is nice (although you'd be crazy to compare Surface to MacBook Pro), but their user experience is terrible in comparison.

Nokia Lumia Windows Phone

[Flavianoep]

I think that what everyone is missing in this discussion is that the complete name of the Lumia phones is four words long. One the first things that was promised when the merge happened was rebranding the name of the products to make them shorter. So change is from Nokia Lumia Windows Phone 930 to

Re:Nokia Lumia Windows Phone

[2ms]

You drastically underestimate the value of the Nokia name. No offense, but I think you must be American. Microsoft is making the same mistake you are. That's why I point it out.

Re:Nokia Lumia Windows Phone

[moderators_are_w*nke]

The have no choice about losing the Nokia name, they only have the rights to it until 2015. After that it reverts back to Nokia who could (in theory) use it to make phones again.

Re:Nokia Lumia Windows Phone

[Flavianoep]

No offense taken. FWIW, I am South American. I don't think Microsoft decision was the best, but they are about to lose the name Nokia in 2015 anyway. --- sent from my Nokia 500

Re:Nokia Lumia Windows Phone

[ahaweb]

The headline says they're replacing "Window Phone" with "Windows", but this is totally wrong. They're replacing "Windows Phone" with "Microsoft Lumia", and dropping the Nokia name completely as fast as possible.

Re:Nokia Lumia Windows Phone

[KevReedUK]

The headline says they're replacing "Window Phone" with "Windows", but this is totally wrong.

They're replacing "Windows Phone" with "Microsoft Lumia", and dropping the Nokia name completely as fast as possible.

WRONG. They're doing both.

For the OS itself:
Windows Phone => Windows

For the hardware:
Nokia Lumia => Lumia

Good decision?

[chr1st1anSoldier]

MS could have been wise about the whole situation and looked to GNOME and Unity as some attempts at putting a touch screen orientated interface on a desktop environment and the uproar it caused. I am not sure how Microsoft thought they would have any different results. And I think MS is trying to beat Apple to unifying their operating systems; they want to look original when they finish first even though they didn't start first.

I wonder

[JustNiz]

I wonder how much money Microsoft will continue to throw at phones, and how many times they will keeping releasing new phones that don't sell before they finally accept that no-one actually likes Widows or trusts Microsoft any more, and that the only reason we use Windows at all is because you can't buy a laptop without it and most of us just have to put up with it at work.

Re:I wonder

[praxis]

the only reason we use Windows at all is because you can't buy a laptop without it

I'm sorry. What?! What OS do you think MacBooks run? It's not Windows!

Re:I wonder

[Anne Thwacks]

If he knew what a Macbook was, he would not have said that.

Re:I wonder

[JustNiz]

Of course I know what a macBook is. Thanks to it being waaay overpriced and having relatively dismal hardware specs, and also being locked into a proprietary Apple universe, I practically don't even consider it a laptop at all, let alone anything I would actually want to give money for.

Re:I wonder

[praxis]

Of course I know what a macBook is. Thanks to it being waaay overpriced and having relatively dismal hardware specs, and also being locked into a proprietary Apple universe, I practically don't even consider it a laptop at all, let alone anything I would actually want to give money for.

Language is funny in that it's a shared method of communicating. If you want to redefine laptop to mean "laptop with a utility to price ratio over X" (however you measure utility) then you should probably say that as when you say "you can't buy a laptop without it", it's quite misleading to most readers that don't share that view.

Re:I wonder

[JustNiz]

On that basis you could argue that a formula 1 racecar would be a good car to do the weekly shopping in, just because it has a steering wheel, an engine, and 4 wheels, just like every other car.

Re:I wonder

[praxis]

On that basis you could argue that a formula 1 racecar would be a good car to do the weekly shopping in, just because it has a steering wheel, an engine, and 4 wheels, just like every other car.

There's a difference between "racecar" (a word connoting a car with a specific purpose: racing) and "car" (a word connoting a general concept with a steering wheel, an engine, and 4 wheels). The word "laptop" is generic (like "car"). Your definition of "laptop" (a portable machine with a price point under X per performance Y running Microsoft Windows): that's much more specific than the general usage of "laptop", more akin to "racecar".

Re:Yup. That sounds perfect.

[neoritter]

Why is that Microsoft get's all the negative flak for stupid people?

Re:I don't know what made me come here

[neoritter]

It's like wading through a hipster party. "Windoooowss baaaaddd! HAR HAR!!!"

Counter-productive renaming obsession

[Dogtanian]

Since there's so much confusion about the differences between RT, Phone, and desktop versions of our OS, let's just call them all by the same name. That will simplify things. Worked for Admiral General Aladeen.

I can't think of a thing microsoft has done in the past few years that aren't one of these:[..]
B. Rebranding an existing product(so many times)

Attention-deficit-rebranding so that no-one knows what the **** is what has long been an apparent obsession with Microsoft, and going by this story, they don't seem to be improving.

I already posted this elsewhere a couple of years back and re-posted it at least once on Slashdot- but no point reinventing the wheel so:-

This is the same company changed the name of its "passport" service a ludicrous amount of times:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_account

"Microsoft Account (previously Microsoft Wallet, Microsoft Passport, .NET Passport, Microsoft Passport Network, and most recently Windows Live ID)"

I'd have said that MS's stupidly confusing naming is marketing-over-clarity, but *it's not even good marketing!!* I bet the man on the street doesn't have a clue what MS's constantly-changing brands-of-the-week are supposed to mean to him anyway, beyond being a confusing and counter-productive mish-mash of pseudo-terminology.

The quintessential ironic example of how MS just don't get it was their (then-)latest media-player compatibility scheme called "Plays for Sure" which obviously implied Apple-style "no brainer just works" straightforwardness. They proceeded to totally undermine this by renaming it to tie in with "Certified for Windows Vista" (which also encompassed other schemes) and launched a separate, incompatible DRM/compatibility scheme for their now-defunct Zune range. Does anyone know (or care) what MS's attention-deficit clusterf*** of overlapping brands are supposed to mean?!

Further thoughts on this are that it may be a reflection of Microsoft's internal political structure and culture, and power struggles, with every newcomer needing to stamp his or her identity on the product, regardless of whether that's beneficial. Either that and/or the environment is conducive to horrendously expensive branding and marketing consultants topping up their cocaine money by suggesting rebrandings at regular intervals- again, regardless of whether it's really needed or not.

Re:Counter-productive renaming obsession

[MrEricSir]

Further thoughts on this are that it may be a reflection of Microsoft's internal political structure and culture, and power struggles, with every newcomer needing to stamp his or her identity on the product, regardless of whether that's beneficial.

Both seem like symptoms of the same problem: nobody's really in charge. This leadership deficit seems like it largely started with Ballmer, who was more interested in yelling and dancing around like a monkey than running his company.

Re:Counter-productive renaming obsession

[lgw]

Hey now, he also took a keen interest in sweating, and in throwing chairs. Leadership Deficit Disorder - I like it.

Total idiots to kill Nokia

[2ms]

That's like if GM bought BMW or something and decided to kill off the brand BMW. People might not buy as many Lumias as they should (IMHO because the marketing efforts of one company can't compete with all the marketing/hype behind Android) but losing the Nokia name would certainly make things much worse. I'd go so far as to say that it's the only thing propping them up all right now.

Re:Total idiots to kill Nokia

[2ms]

Windows Phone or whatever you call it will be toast when it's no longer on Nokia phones. That's the bottom line. No one in the world wants a Microsoft phone. However, Nokia is arguably the most prestigious mobile maker in the world. It's right up there with Apple. It may have been slower to mimic the iPhone than some others were were. But much like BMW/Mercedes/Audi are being slow to mimic the Tesla Model S, they are still hugely admired, desired, respected. Nobody is going to want to buy a Microsoft brand phone. That's a proposition that has absolutely nothing going for it other than a good OS that has been failing anyway IN SPITE OF the Nokia brand.

Oversimplification vs. overcomplication

[Art3x]

Compared to the Microsofty cacophony of yesteryear:

- Windows Starter
- Windows Home Basic
- Windows Home Premium
- Windows Professional
- Windows Enterprise
- Windows Ultimate

and that's just for the Desktop edition. I'll take a move in the opposite direction, hoping they'll eventually settle on a happy medium.

Re:Oversimplification vs. overcomplication

[Irate Engineer]

I'm waiting for the Windows Knock-Off-The-Bells-n-Whistles-Bullshit-And-Let-Us-Get-Work-Done Edition myself.

Re:Oversimplification vs. overcomplication

[93 Escort Wagon]

I'll believe it when I actually see it. What I really expect to see is the following - six different products named like this:

- Windows
- Windows
- Windows
- Windows
- Windows
- Windows

But "Windows" only lets you run three programs at once. If you want more, you'll need to buy an upgrade to "Windows" - but that won't join an AD domain. Therefore office workers will want to purchase Windows, which can participate in AD. However if you want all the bells and whistles, the one you'll want to buy is Windows.

That's all clear, right?

Re:Oversimplification vs. overcomplication

[Teresita]

So if everything is just Windows, that's going to turn tech support into a major Charlie Foxtrot. "Exactly what Microsoft product are you complaining about today, sir?" "Uh...Windows."

Awkward

[randallman]

I always felt awkward saying Windows Phone Phone.

next version of windows

[mbkennel]

The next version of Windows should be called Windows and actually be Windows and actually improved, and not Surface. That stream will just keep going but nobody likes it.

"Windows" shouldn't be going on phones, tablets, surfaces, anything else that doesn't need to be.

MacOS was hardly as tainted as Windows but Apple didn't say the iPhone was a Mac when it wasn't.

Re:Yup. That sounds perfect.

[BLToday]

Probably it's because Microsoft's issue is their confusing message. Do you really expect normal people to understand that Windows on a phone won't be available to run Windows application for desktop? To a normal person "Windows" is "Windows".

Doesnt matter what they call it now...

[rjejr]

Next week we'll all be running Microsoft Minecraft on our Minecraft Phones and using Minecraft Office.

exactly the problem

[mbkennel]

Microsoft should be doing everything in its power to make the one brand that people like to be the powerful, single name.

Nokia Lumia Windows Phone 930 ------------> the Nokia.

  "Let me Google it(*) on my Nokia". Metro/Modern/Surface/WinPhone -> NokiaOS. There are NO WINDOWS on the interface!

The next brand down they have is Skype.

Re:exactly the problem

[moderators_are_w*nke]

They only have the rights till 2015 so they can't.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

Re:I don't know what made me come here

[dpbsmith]

And you can't even tell me which one that is--because they are all called "Windows."

correction: 1 OS to FAIL them all

[jsepeta]

Apple has already proven that one size does not fit all when it comes to operating systems by demonstrating the performance benefits of right-sizing an OS for a hardware platform. Microsoft seconded this notion with Windows 8, stuffing a touch-based OS into a zillion pc's without touch screens. Alas, they're still a couple of dimes short of a dollar, and are pushing a one-size-fits-all solution that pretty much everyone else agrees is a terrible idea.

Re:correction: 1 OS to FAIL them all

[david_thornley]

I'm convinced that, if Microsoft had provided an easy way to operate at all times in a Windows 7 UI, Windows 8 would have been a success, being a significantly improved Windows 7.

Re:Yup. That sounds perfect.

[steelfood]

Because they also make the most noise about it.

I've got a great idea

[viperidaenz]

Let's buy a brand, then phase out the name of the brand.
What could go wrong?

Re:I've got a great idea

[eclectro]

What could go wrong?

Developers! Developers! Developers!

Re:I've got a great idea

[Lunix Nutcase]

They didn't buy the brand. They licensed it until the end of 2015.

They must think rebranding fixes crap

[Kris_J]

Does anyone remember Windows CE, Pocket PC & Windows Mobile? It's all the same thing. They realise the brand is ruined, release an iterative update, change the name and congratulate themselves on a job well done.

Trackpad

[tepples]

A 5" device outputting to an external screen with a mouse and keyboard attached could obviously support desktop usage.

You wouldn't even need an external mouse. With just a keyboard and monitor, a phone could act like a trackpad.

Re:Trackpad

[exomondo]

You wouldn't even need an external mouse. With just a keyboard and monitor, a phone could act like a trackpad.

Well yes from a practical perspective a trackpad is a mouse and the phone could be configured to provide that functionality.

Re:garbage phone

[Teresita]

If you can't move files off your phone, file a Freedom of Information Act and make the NSA give you a copy of their copy of your file. After all, it's a Windows phone.

hum

[Anonymous Coward]

Lumia Xphone
Lumia MetroX
Lumia One
Lumia zune
Lumia 360 -> 1080? like the xbox

I find the windows phone 8.1 tiling much more intuitive than the confusing and small icon based android.

They've almost achieved their goal

[msobkow]

One Windows. One platform. Every device.

And we suck farts off dead chickens on every single one of them.

But you'll keep buying our crap, so we'll keep shovelling it.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

/. readers talk badly of an MS product - shocking

[BurgEnder]

also, I'm betting the percentage of /. users who've tried WP = 0.00000000001%

I'm no MS apologist, but /. seems to have become the FoxNews of tech.

Windows the phone or OS?

[ayesnymous]

"Microsoft is killing off the "Windows Phone" name in favor of Windows." So when someone says Windows, you won't know if they are referring to the phone or the OS?

Re:Windows the phone or OS?

[KevReedUK]

The aim was to do away with the mindless tautology of referring to a Windows Phone Phone. An Android Phone is called such, because the OS is called Android, not Android Phone, therefore, technically, until this move is completed, we should be referring to WP-based handsets as Windows Phone Phones. This simply allows you to drop the first "phone" when referring to them.

The "one size fits all" thing again?

[dbIII]

but I'm afraid it's not even a grey cloud on the horizon as far as microsoft is concerned

Which is sadly a major problem with MS since you can use just about any word there other than linux. "Not invented here" is why we ended up with insecure piles of shit for years despite people inside MS knowing better from seeing examples elsewhere. Thus cut down CP/M with a Mac ripoff taped on top and then cut down VMS without the documentation, repeating the mistakes made elsewhere a decade or two after some of MS's own employees had seen the consequences elsewhere but couldn't get messages through the management structure.

but as long as there are 10 windows managers and 2000 distributions it'll never, ever happen.

There was one common desktop environment - called CDE of all things. Some people at Sun liked it and that's just about it. When you have a platform where nobody can force you to conform and nothing is perfect for everyone you get choice - it's a feature not a flaw. I'll remind you that not even MS has a single interface across all of their products - go to parts of "control panel" in Win8.1 if you want a reminder that it's not even consistent across a single product. I could be argued either way if it's a feature or flaw even in that case.

Idea worked

[dbIII]

A potential competitor selling a scary pocket computer idea is gone, just like the linux netbook was killed by putting pressure on ASUS.
I've got no idea how viable the idea of stuff like the N900 was - I've got one and still love it. Would it or it's successors have taken off? No idea, it was barely advertised and released very slowly (2 years between European and Australian releases, with the US fairly late as well) so it's almost as if Nokia was not trying to sell it.

Re:Yup. That sounds perfect.

[hawkinspeter]

Is it because all the stupid people use Microsoft?

Not late - just low quality

[zerofoo]

I had Windows CE and Windows Mobile devices for YEARS before I got my first iOS or Android device. I also had Palm devices before then as well.

They were good for their time, but iOS introduced a touch interface that actually worked with your finger and a real web browser on a mobile device.

Why Microsoft couldn't get that together during the 5 year period before iOS speaks to their incompetence.

They may not know any better

[zerofoo]

During my consulting gigs, I found very few windows users that actually knew anything different. They all have windows at work (and someone to fix it when it shits the bed).

So far, every single person that has migrated to Mac OS from windows, tells me that the experience is much better on the Mac side. What people usually notice is how little Mac OS interrupts your workflow. Windows is constantly interrupting with updates, or crashed print queues, or explorer windows that simply stop working.

Windows has been patched together for so many years, that a complete redesign is necessary, yet Microsoft is afraid to cut the old stuff loose. MS can never progress if they aren't willing to let the past go.

Re:They may not know any better

[KevReedUK]

...Microsoft is afraid to cut the old stuff loose. MS can never progress if they aren't willing to let the past go.

If they did make a complete break with the past code-base and did a complete redesign from the ground up, as you seem to be suggesting, how would you propose that legacy apps continue to run on it?

It would appear, from the tone of your comment, that you are suggesting MS's answer should be "F@#k 'em"!

If they were to take your suggestion, they would kill one of the biggest drivers in keeping MS entrenched in businesses. They may have made some pretty questionable moves over the last few years, but an all-out bid for suicide doesn't quite seem to be part of their game-plan.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that such a long-lived code-base could do with a complete rewrite to make it easier for them to support and build on going forward. They are, however, in the unenviable position of having a significant portion of their customers dependent on legacy applications that work only because the code-base is so long-lived and backward compatible.

Do you remember, for example, when Vista came out and a major component of the NT security model was updated (i.e. it actually started to have something resembling one with regard to what privilege levels an application could run in), killing the ability of many applications to run/install? At least there it was a new feature that had been added and could be turned off that was causing the programs not to work. How much worse do you think it is going to be if your proposed full rewrite broke a wide range of popular legacy applications and the only way to get them to work was to wither replace them, or downgrade back to an earlier version of the OS?

If there was ever a use for this...

[MachineShedFred]

[Citation Needed]

Re:raw speed of Win32 in Win2K and XP

[DocSavage64109]

Bah, that's not raw speed. Raw speed is the fraction of 1 second it took to boot up Windows 3.1 on a pentium 90. I refuse to use anything newer than my awesomely fast booting Win 3.1!

I think it's because

[kilodelta]

The Microsoft brand name is heavily tarnished. That's why they are dropping it to just be the Windows phone otherwise known as a bloated piece of shit.

Windows/Microsoft/Nokia

[CauseBy]

Yeah, totally, because the problem with these products is the names used to sell them.

Totally.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Brand Name Change

[jtownatpunk.net]

They'd probably sue themselves for licensing fees.

Re:Yup. That sounds perfect.

[david_thornley]

Because when stupid people use Apple stuff enough "just works" to keep them happy.

Re:I don't know what made me come here

[david_thornley]

Mice?