That and the fact that the Ep IV sabers were so brittle, they weren't even allowed to make full contact with each other. The actors were told to keep it as gentle as possible 'cos the sabers kept shattering. The original light sabers actually emanated... you know... light. They wee made of real light bulbs in them illuminating a lucite-type material. You can actually see the power cord on Obi-Wan's wrist in one of the shots. Later on, they decided to colorize them after the fliming, It was only in later films that they decided to just use sticks and draw all of the effects in post production. The episode IV's fight scene's "lameness" is partially a result of the actors having to be gentle and play nice with their fragile props. Alec Guinness was actually an accomplished swordsman himself, but he was forced to "tone it down".
Another slashdot reader commented on WP's lack of corporate IT-friendly features. It doesn't integrate well with the workplace, so it can't take advantage of the huge opening that RIM is giving them. The iPhone sucks at corporate integration, too, but the iPhone is already popular, so it doesn't matter. MS is blowing a huge opportunity, because of their shortsightedness.
I think the most head scratching decision from Microsoft was not supporting native binaries on WMP7. Android started out there, but now it does support native, due to performance and legacy.
Microsoft makes money out of their product, which in this case is WMP7. It's simply not possible for them to open their system to the level of Android. You can customize Android quite extensively and still maintain binary compability. Google might sue you if you try to call it Android however.
Like Microsoft's recent fetish for the iPhone, they also had a big fetish for Java and VM's, so everything had to run on a VM!! It was the future! No more native binaries on anything! Why? Who knows! But, MS went all in on that. That paradigm certainly makes developing for the Windows Phone much easier, but it does limit one's options. As for opening up their system, no one is expecting them to open up their system to the level that Android does, but it would be nice if they could at least open up the system to the level of... say, their own Microsoft Windows.
You're right, they were early. They could have locked a dominant share of the market a decade ago, and yet they managed to mess that up, too, when their only competition was a hardly intimidating Palm, Inc. That just shows you how massive a failure MS has been in the mobile arena.
i) alienating developers by locking the device down j) related to c, which is that the required hardware specs for the phones are already dated k) insisting on following the failed "kin" model.
3 times a week? how did you manage that kind of stability. Mine crashed at least twice a day. I didn't mind, since the reboot was quick and it was Microsoft (so you don't expect very much), but I can see how other people hated it.
Apple has a great consumer brand. Microsoft, not so much. People associate Apple with fun and ease of use. People associate Microsoft with the blue screen of death.
Their audience SHOULD be disaffected Blackberry customers and their IT departments, but Microsoft didn't design the phone to compete in that segment... a poor choice, since RIM is collapsing right now. If Microsoft had any foresight, they could have swooped into that market and regained their footing, but a "facebook phone" isn't going to compete in the business market no matter how well it integrates with MS Exchange.
Apple's total cost of ownership is much higher, from their ridiculous AppleCare fees, to higher component prices (like battery replacement), higher accessory prices (like cases and adapters), and significantly higher fees for apps. The phone prices are in line with higher level Android phones, but there are also a lot more inexpensive Android phones that are literally given away for free on contract. Joining the Apple world is very expensive, even when the product is subsidized by a cellular carrier.
Your first explanation is the biggest reason Windows Phone is hurting... They are coming in waaaay too late to the party. They couldn't even manage to get Nokia to release a phone in time for Christmas this year. (shakes head) The reason why Android took off was that they were the only viable anti-iPhone product out there that was desperately looking an alternative, especially on Verizon. Palm blew it by tying itself to Sprint, so Android came in and became the yin to Apple's yang. Now, Microsoft has to muscle their way into the market with two heavyweights while having to overcome their terrible reputation, terrible consumer brand, and hardware and software features that are already behind the curve. Microsoft targeted the wrong market. They should have tried to be the anti-blackberry and muscle in on the business side of things, where they have a lot of clout (i.e. email). Shooting for the iPhone/anti-iPhone market was really shooting for the moon and I'm not sure I see how they manage to get there.
With RIM collapsing, there's an opportunity for Microsoft, but once again, they aren't prepared to jump on it. Windows phone isn't designed for that kind of market segment, and it's another square peg in a round hole situation. It's amazing how asleep at the switch Ballmer has been compared to his predecessor. Bill Gates would never have allowed this opportunity to languish for MS like it has.
Closing up the Windows Phone so tightly (copying Apple's strategy) is another headscracther. It certainly goes against their "Developers, developers, developers" strategy that they've had for so many years. Opening up the OS not only engenders developer goodwill, it allows them to discover and develop the "killer app" that would help drive Windows Phone sales. Their whole mobile strategy has been FUBAR for so may years. They essentially could have locked it up a decade ago when they were practically the only game in town, but they just keep screwing it up. It's amazing that they manage to get the XBox stuff right. Maybe they should talk to that division and get some ideas. Had they tried to emulate their own XBox paradigm instead of trying to copy Apple's, Microsoft wouldn't be having the mobile market troubles they are having right now.
It's a shame that Apple has run so far away from its roots that it discourages true native development on their mobile devices. The iPad would be ideal for a hypercard app of some sort for kids and novices to actually be creative with their devices... It's very sad that Apple still claims to be an educational/creative company that encourages users to "Think different", when there is one glaring omission--creating something for your Apple device.
What's that I hear? Steve jobs spinning in his grave? He can't be happy looking down at his consumers and them having some choices in what they want to run on "his" hardware. Oh well...
They didn't seem to have a problem with multitasking on previous windows mobile devices. I've used Windows Mobile devices going all the way back to Palm-Sized PC (i.e. version 1) and multitasking never presented much of a problem back then, nor did it present much of a problem with version 6 a year ago.
What their announcement means is that they realized that dumbing-down their devices to try and be like the iPhone was a stupid move. They thought that "simplifying" features might make their buggy software more "robust". It ended up only making their devices look lame and behind the times.
Most consumer's minds?? Say what? Most consumers just assume Windows and Microsoft is everything and nothing else matters.
Ten years ago, perhaps, but public attitudes have changed, especially after the Vista debacle. It wasn't me who stated that Microsoft is a damaged consumer brand, that came from a headline at CNN a few months ago. Ask any person what they think of Microsoft vs. say Apple and see what they say. Actually, you don't need to do that, poll after poll shows that to be true. Microsoft is at the bottom of the heap in consumer favorability. Microsoft has been unable to penetrate the marketplace with Zune, Bing, etc. no matter how much marketing they put into it 'cos people are put off by the brand. "Average. normal" people are the ones who have had the most problems with Microsoft software, not power users, and they are the ones who have run to Apple now that the company has become viable, and Google if they want a cheaper consumer-friendly option.
XBox has been MS's only real success story in the last decade and they did it by making their system open, flexible, and network aware than their competitors--basically what Android did to iPhone. They don't have the same advantage here.
I love how you mention Zune as a great success story... The Zune has been Microsoft's second biggest failure to date (next to the Kin, which was a preview to WP7). Unfortunately for Microsoft, WP7 has Zune written all over it--same ideas, same marketing, same distribution, etc. The ultimate failure of the Kin has been a bad omen for WP7, which has been marketed as the Kin+. They need to make big changes to catch up. Microsoft is making a bold, smart move with Nokia to stay relevant, but it is still a desperate move with the odds against it paying off. If it does pay off, then it will be big, but it's like a hail mary pass at the end of a football game--hope it works 'cos it's all you got left.
WP7 will not sell heavily until MS can break blackberry's hold on the enterprise market
They wanted to take on the iPhone, when they should have taken on the Blackberry. Plenty of IT managers would love to have an all MS shop with a phone that worked flawlessly within their systems. Instead, Microsoft targeted the consumer market (and added features that would actually alienate IT managers), forgetting that Microsoft has a severely damaged consumer brand. People run Ms software 'cos they have to, not 'cos they want to. In most consumers' minds, Microsoft is synonymous with bloated, unfinished, barely working, buggy software. They aren't eager to relive their PC misery with their phones if they have other choices, which is why the iPhone does so well. Apple has a great consumer brand and the iPhone (unlike the mac) is subsidized enough that the average user can afford it.
...Apple will need to take a pay cut. Apple needs Verizon more than Verizon needs Apple )inorder to crush the Android competition). Verizon is doing very well with their Android phones, so hey don't need to pay the kings ransom that AT&T does for the iPhone. Without the iPhone, AT&T is nothing, and everyone knows it. Apple will want Verizon to pay the same kind of subsidies that AT&T is paying. Verizon is unlikely to comply. It doesn't make much business sense for them to abandon a popular free platform such as Android for a much more expensive one. Meanwhile, AT&T will do anything and everything that Jobs wants to keep exclusivity (and prevent their customers from abandoning them in droves). Jobs probably wants to open up to other carriers, but AT&T will be paying so much to keep exclusivity, it will be very hard for Jobs to say no (especially, since Verizon is unlikely to play ball in negotiations).
If Apple goes to another carrier, Sprint and T-Mobile are the more likely candidates. They will pay a lot to get the iPhone. Verizon probably won't.
I got this book for my 13 year old nephew and it was a real hit. It's geared towards middle schoolers who are used to point and click stuff, guides them through a similar game engine, then gradually introduces them to coding concepts. He loves the book and the tools, although I am having a hard time getting him to move ahead and code for real, but it's a great start. I highly recommend the book.
...the video gamers who are the ones who need net neutrality legislation the most to prevent ISP's from choking off their bandwidth... Clever, and probably very effective, too. No one ever seems to challenge their lies, and the general population is more likely to believe lies than they are the truth (i.e. death panels). Amazing that they can get away with this, but these guys are good. They've been taking away the livelihood of the middle class for a generation and yet people are still cheering them on!
Slashdot Mirror
That and the fact that the Ep IV sabers were so brittle, they weren't even allowed to make full contact with each other. The actors were told to keep it as gentle as possible 'cos the sabers kept shattering. The original light sabers actually emanated... you know... light. They wee made of real light bulbs in them illuminating a lucite-type material. You can actually see the power cord on Obi-Wan's wrist in one of the shots. Later on, they decided to colorize them after the fliming, It was only in later films that they decided to just use sticks and draw all of the effects in post production. The episode IV's fight scene's "lameness" is partially a result of the actors having to be gentle and play nice with their fragile props. Alec Guinness was actually an accomplished swordsman himself, but he was forced to "tone it down".
Another slashdot reader commented on WP's lack of corporate IT-friendly features. It doesn't integrate well with the workplace, so it can't take advantage of the huge opening that RIM is giving them. The iPhone sucks at corporate integration, too, but the iPhone is already popular, so it doesn't matter. MS is blowing a huge opportunity, because of their shortsightedness.
I think the most head scratching decision from Microsoft was not supporting native binaries on WMP7. Android started out there, but now it does support native, due to performance and legacy.
Microsoft makes money out of their product, which in this case is WMP7. It's simply not possible for them to open their system to the level of Android. You can customize Android quite extensively and still maintain binary compability. Google might sue you if you try to call it Android however.
Like Microsoft's recent fetish for the iPhone, they also had a big fetish for Java and VM's, so everything had to run on a VM!! It was the future! No more native binaries on anything! Why? Who knows! But, MS went all in on that. That paradigm certainly makes developing for the Windows Phone much easier, but it does limit one's options. As for opening up their system, no one is expecting them to open up their system to the level that Android does, but it would be nice if they could at least open up the system to the level of... say, their own Microsoft Windows.
You're right, they were early. They could have locked a dominant share of the market a decade ago, and yet they managed to mess that up, too, when their only competition was a hardly intimidating Palm, Inc. That just shows you how massive a failure MS has been in the mobile arena.
i) alienating developers by locking the device down
j) related to c, which is that the required hardware specs for the phones are already dated
k) insisting on following the failed "kin" model.
3 times a week? how did you manage that kind of stability. Mine crashed at least twice a day. I didn't mind, since the reboot was quick and it was Microsoft (so you don't expect very much), but I can see how other people hated it.
Apple has a great consumer brand. Microsoft, not so much. People associate Apple with fun and ease of use. People associate Microsoft with the blue screen of death.
Their audience SHOULD be disaffected Blackberry customers and their IT departments, but Microsoft didn't design the phone to compete in that segment... a poor choice, since RIM is collapsing right now. If Microsoft had any foresight, they could have swooped into that market and regained their footing, but a "facebook phone" isn't going to compete in the business market no matter how well it integrates with MS Exchange.
Apple's total cost of ownership is much higher, from their ridiculous AppleCare fees, to higher component prices (like battery replacement), higher accessory prices (like cases and adapters), and significantly higher fees for apps. The phone prices are in line with higher level Android phones, but there are also a lot more inexpensive Android phones that are literally given away for free on contract. Joining the Apple world is very expensive, even when the product is subsidized by a cellular carrier.
Your first explanation is the biggest reason Windows Phone is hurting... They are coming in waaaay too late to the party. They couldn't even manage to get Nokia to release a phone in time for Christmas this year. (shakes head) The reason why Android took off was that they were the only viable anti-iPhone product out there that was desperately looking an alternative, especially on Verizon. Palm blew it by tying itself to Sprint, so Android came in and became the yin to Apple's yang. Now, Microsoft has to muscle their way into the market with two heavyweights while having to overcome their terrible reputation, terrible consumer brand, and hardware and software features that are already behind the curve. Microsoft targeted the wrong market. They should have tried to be the anti-blackberry and muscle in on the business side of things, where they have a lot of clout (i.e. email). Shooting for the iPhone/anti-iPhone market was really shooting for the moon and I'm not sure I see how they manage to get there.
With RIM collapsing, there's an opportunity for Microsoft, but once again, they aren't prepared to jump on it. Windows phone isn't designed for that kind of market segment, and it's another square peg in a round hole situation. It's amazing how asleep at the switch Ballmer has been compared to his predecessor. Bill Gates would never have allowed this opportunity to languish for MS like it has.
Closing up the Windows Phone so tightly (copying Apple's strategy) is another headscracther. It certainly goes against their "Developers, developers, developers" strategy that they've had for so many years. Opening up the OS not only engenders developer goodwill, it allows them to discover and develop the "killer app" that would help drive Windows Phone sales. Their whole mobile strategy has been FUBAR for so may years. They essentially could have locked it up a decade ago when they were practically the only game in town, but they just keep screwing it up. It's amazing that they manage to get the XBox stuff right. Maybe they should talk to that division and get some ideas. Had they tried to emulate their own XBox paradigm instead of trying to copy Apple's, Microsoft wouldn't be having the mobile market troubles they are having right now.
Verizon unlimited customers are grandfathered in for now, at least.
And for the Android ecosystem:
https://market.android.com/details?id=com.rfo.basic&feature=search_result#?t=W251bGwsMSwxLDEsImNvbS5yZm8uYmFzaWMiXQ.. (Already mentioned above. What's not mentioned is that it is from the maker of Atari BASIC in the 70's and is fully 100% GPL...pretty cool! It also has a strong user/developer community from what I can see from the forum, which is also pretty cool).
https://market.android.com/details?id=com.mintoris.basic&feature=search_result#?t=W251bGwsMSwxLDEsImNvbS5taW50b3Jpcy5iYXNpYyJd
(Not GPL, but quite powerful)
https://market.android.com/details?id=pix.arts.lightbasic&feature=search_result#?t=W251bGwsMSwxLDEsInBpeC5hcnRzLmxpZ2h0YmFzaWMiXQ..
It's a shame that Apple has run so far away from its roots that it discourages true native development on their mobile devices. The iPad would be ideal for a hypercard app of some sort for kids and novices to actually be creative with their devices... It's very sad that Apple still claims to be an educational/creative company that encourages users to "Think different", when there is one glaring omission--creating something for your Apple device.
What's that I hear? Steve jobs spinning in his grave? He can't be happy looking down at his consumers and them having some choices in what they want to run on "his" hardware. Oh well...
You forgot the...
Beeeoooouuuuwwwww!
Sound effect...
You got it wrong. The right wing response to this is, "Business can do whatever it wants." Period.
Splitter!!!
Found him!!!
http://www.forrestmims.com/
Get him signed up, stat!!!
They didn't seem to have a problem with multitasking on previous windows mobile devices. I've used Windows Mobile devices going all the way back to Palm-Sized PC (i.e. version 1) and multitasking never presented much of a problem back then, nor did it present much of a problem with version 6 a year ago.
What their announcement means is that they realized that dumbing-down their devices to try and be like the iPhone was a stupid move. They thought that "simplifying" features might make their buggy software more "robust". It ended up only making their devices look lame and behind the times.
Most consumer's minds?? Say what? Most consumers just assume Windows and Microsoft is everything and nothing else matters.
Ten years ago, perhaps, but public attitudes have changed, especially after the Vista debacle. It wasn't me who stated that Microsoft is a damaged consumer brand, that came from a headline at CNN a few months ago. Ask any person what they think of Microsoft vs. say Apple and see what they say. Actually, you don't need to do that, poll after poll shows that to be true. Microsoft is at the bottom of the heap in consumer favorability. Microsoft has been unable to penetrate the marketplace with Zune, Bing, etc. no matter how much marketing they put into it 'cos people are put off by the brand. "Average. normal" people are the ones who have had the most problems with Microsoft software, not power users, and they are the ones who have run to Apple now that the company has become viable, and Google if they want a cheaper consumer-friendly option.
XBox has been MS's only real success story in the last decade and they did it by making their system open, flexible, and network aware than their competitors--basically what Android did to iPhone. They don't have the same advantage here.
I love how you mention Zune as a great success story... The Zune has been Microsoft's second biggest failure to date (next to the Kin, which was a preview to WP7). Unfortunately for Microsoft, WP7 has Zune written all over it--same ideas, same marketing, same distribution, etc. The ultimate failure of the Kin has been a bad omen for WP7, which has been marketed as the Kin+. They need to make big changes to catch up. Microsoft is making a bold, smart move with Nokia to stay relevant, but it is still a desperate move with the odds against it paying off. If it does pay off, then it will be big, but it's like a hail mary pass at the end of a football game--hope it works 'cos it's all you got left.
WP7 will not sell heavily until MS can break blackberry's hold on the enterprise market
They wanted to take on the iPhone, when they should have taken on the Blackberry. Plenty of IT managers would love to have an all MS shop with a phone that worked flawlessly within their systems. Instead, Microsoft targeted the consumer market (and added features that would actually alienate IT managers), forgetting that Microsoft has a severely damaged consumer brand. People run Ms software 'cos they have to, not 'cos they want to. In most consumers' minds, Microsoft is synonymous with bloated, unfinished, barely working, buggy software. They aren't eager to relive their PC misery with their phones if they have other choices, which is why the iPhone does so well. Apple has a great consumer brand and the iPhone (unlike the mac) is subsidized enough that the average user can afford it.
...Apple will need to take a pay cut. Apple needs Verizon more than Verizon needs Apple )inorder to crush the Android competition). Verizon is doing very well with their Android phones, so hey don't need to pay the kings ransom that AT&T does for the iPhone. Without the iPhone, AT&T is nothing, and everyone knows it. Apple will want Verizon to pay the same kind of subsidies that AT&T is paying. Verizon is unlikely to comply. It doesn't make much business sense for them to abandon a popular free platform such as Android for a much more expensive one. Meanwhile, AT&T will do anything and everything that Jobs wants to keep exclusivity (and prevent their customers from abandoning them in droves). Jobs probably wants to open up to other carriers, but AT&T will be paying so much to keep exclusivity, it will be very hard for Jobs to say no (especially, since Verizon is unlikely to play ball in negotiations).
If Apple goes to another carrier, Sprint and T-Mobile are the more likely candidates. They will pay a lot to get the iPhone. Verizon probably won't.
I got this book for my 13 year old nephew and it was a real hit. It's geared towards middle schoolers who are used to point and click stuff, guides them through a similar game engine, then gradually introduces them to coding concepts. He loves the book and the tools, although I am having a hard time getting him to move ahead and code for real, but it's a great start. I highly recommend the book.
Actually, the rotary phone dialing system was patented, but it was about a 100 years ago. The patent has expired.
...the video gamers who are the ones who need net neutrality legislation the most to prevent ISP's from choking off their bandwidth... Clever, and probably very effective, too. No one ever seems to challenge their lies, and the general population is more likely to believe lies than they are the truth (i.e. death panels). Amazing that they can get away with this, but these guys are good. They've been taking away the livelihood of the middle class for a generation and yet people are still cheering them on!