Oh, there's plenty of innovation coming from Apple engineers, just as there's always been. The problem is that Jobs is no longer there to tell them when their ideas are complete shit, so it all gets released. It seems like all someone at Apple has to do to get approval for their pet project under Cook is dangle the promise of a dollar in front of him.
Someone doesn't understand the difference between long term success and nabbing a nice golden parachute on their way out the door of the company they just sunk, I think.
Please give specific example of what a Windows phone can't do right now.
Have more than 2 years of remaining vendor support and an app store that hasn't mostly stopped seeing updates to major apps.
Oh, wait, you asked for one; sorry, that was two, one of which was actually an issue raised by a Lumia 950 owner elsewhere in the thread Of course, you provided a few of your own: still hold a charge, USB Host Mode, connect to LTE networks, and properly render web pages (to which I'll add: run browsers that aren't using Edge's rendering and JS engines).
I don't disagree that picking a Windows phone now isn't the best choice for most people. But you come off as a jackass.
Well, that certainly is one way of looking at it, and perhaps you're right. Or, perhaps I simply grew weary of having to defend my position against someone who doesn't understand how to weigh options, risks, and advantages is various choices, y'know?
Most successful people I know weigh options, risks, and advantages of various choices and don't make sweeping generalizations...
Indeed, and this particular option carries the risk (a guarantee, actually) of lacking long-term support and a rapidly-degrading experience if you actually intend to use it as a smartphone. There was no sweeping generalization made, I never said Windows Phone is a horrible platform or that no good hardware was ever made to run it; on the contrary, I said it was a platform with potential, run into the ground and abandoned by its creator. I actually have some love for the poor thing, honestly; I just think it's a bad idea to suggest it as an option to someone looking for a phone they've held onto for 9 years, given vendor support will be ending in 2 and the store is already massively degraded because no vendors want to spend the time and money to keep their apps updated on a dying platform.
but I'm an engineer who specializes in HPC so I could easily run with a different crowd than someone in IT support, web development or management/business.
I see, an egotistical appeal to authority. What was it that you just said I was coming off as?
(I'd be willing to bet you fall into one of those three)
You could easily verify for yourself, but I'll save you the trouble. You're not entirely wrong; I actually cover two of the three, but that is not the sum total of my life experience, so it's hardly relevant here. Keep in mind that the management/business types are the whole reason you have a job in the first place; if we weren't successful, you'd be unemployed. Your high horse has a wounded knee.
Typewriters aren't what I'd call a dead platform. You can still buy them new, get manufacturer support, and find replacement parts and ink ribbons for them. Old doesn't mean dead.
Outdated but still effective for its intended purpose, yes. Windows phone is no longer effective for its intended purpose for most legitimate smartphone use cases; for many, it simply never was, in large part because Microsoft kept too tight of a grip on it and was too overbearing.
Successful people use what works and stick with it for as long as it will continue working for the foreseeable future so, yes, most of them do end up sticking with outdated (but still fully functional and, likely, supported by someone) tech. But those same successful people get off of dead platforms (and I'm not simply speaking in terms of phones here) as quickly as possible once they learn of the platform's impending demise.
We're half a year into Windows Phone being at that stage in its lifecycle; nobody with a propensity for making successful life choices is choosing to use it at this point.
As long as the camera works, I'd say keep it for that; I kept an old feature phone that had an excellent 2MP camera with proper OIS and autofocus, simply because it still made for better prints than 4 and 5MP cameras that were available on phones until just a few years ago. I've got nothing against using what works for you, or sticking with the dying platform because you're already there, of course; that would just be silly. It sounds like you might already be considering other options at this point, anyway.
Hopefully, the camera functionality will keep working after MS fully drops support, because yes, the cameras on those phones are incredible and it would be sad to see them just break because some company, not even the manufacturer, flipped a switch.
If all you use is the features that come with the phone and maybe a handful of free apps, more power to you, have at it. If you really want to keep using a device that's a year or more out of support (there are only 2 years left, remember), especially running a Microsoft OS with no security patches, go right ahead. Sure, it'll "work", it'll power on and at least the default functionality will probably be there; if you ever need to restore after they kill support, your apps will be lost, of course. I wouldn't really consider simply turning on and booting to be "working", when the device is intended to do so much more than that and those functions will necessarily break when Microsoft quits supporting them.
If you use any apps, you clearly haven't considered that you might need some time to find suitable replacements, or you really don't actually use them enough to care about potential substantial workflow changes. Having migrated from Blackberry to iOS to Android, I've been around the block a couple times; if you have some app that does some function a certain way, it takes time to sift through all the available apps on your new platform that perform that function, in order to find one that has the options you need and works the way you need it to.
Again, though, if all you care about is the most basic of functionality, sure, stick with Windows Phone. That's all you'll have when MS pulls the plug and, really, you don't even need a smartphone for those functions; most feature phones will perform those tasks, including GPS now, with multiple days of battery life.
For someone who actually uses a smartphone as a smartphone, adopting a dead platform is simply beyond idiotic and suggesting it as an option is either ignorant, malicious, or both.
What in the fuck are you talking about? "Hopes and dreams?" I'm talking about a phone.
I'm talking about behavior patterns of intelligent and successful individuals, and adopting a dead platform is not one of those patterns.
You're going to have to switch platforms in 2 years, one way or the other. End of life is when you start moving off of a platform, not when you adopt it; the 2.5 years of "support" Microsoft has pledged Windows phone is intended to allow current users enough time to migrate to another solution.
So much better that Microsoft has dropped the platform altogether. Bravo.
It had potential, don't get me wrong; and if Microsoft hadn't screwed every single pooch they encountered on their journey with Windows Phone, I'm sure it would be a real winner, but...
Other than it crashing -- and taking the whole browser down with it, with no warning or error message -- all the freakin' time, you're right. Nothing wrong with it at all.
Mind you, this was while on the phone with an Office 365 support rep, trying to sort out an account issue, while he was remotely viewing my screen. That is, the page crashing it was on a Microsoft site. After 5 crashes, the rep suggested we switch to Chrome and I pointed out that I was using Firefox at the beginning of the call for a reason.
I pretty much explain it in the last paragraph. I didn't think I had to spell it out step by step here on Slashdot, but I was apparently wrong. A company's market share grows when more people buy their products relative to the growth of their competitors; to grow a company, the market must begin to favor them over competitors.
It's economics 101 and completely obvious to any 5 year old with a long enough attention span to have learned how to read and type. I really can't believe I had to explain it.
I won't get into an argument over whether you're right about that or not, but I will say we can work to make that point entirely irrelevant. If we work to give AMD and Intel roughly equal market share, then start propping VIA up until we have 3 equal players (VIA could catch up in performance and power efficiency with some funding; they've got the engineering capabilities, they simply lack funding). As each of the smaller players gets bigger, the bigger player gets smaller; we begin opening the door for a fourth serious player, then a fifth, and so on.
If AMD and Intel are both compromised in the market, and let's go ahead and assume they are for the purpose of this discussion, the correct response is to redistribute market share in a way that shrinks the biggest players and makes room for new players who may not be compromised.
Since VIA is not an option for the typical desktop or workstation user, and there are no other players, that means growing AMD even if they're also compromised, simply to shrink Intel. Then, we start growing VIA for lower-power needs, until they're able to catch up in performance-per-watt; then we grow them to be Intel and AMD's equals. We show other foundries that there is room to grow in the x86 market, they step up, we grow them, then we win.
Yes, the risk in that metaphor is that of revealing a truth about programming. That is, some people like to code instinctively, as well... As for self-evident or situational steps, we have libraries that give us those. As for baking a cake: you gotta do the cooking by the book, you know you can't be lazy.
Y'know, there's a big difference between "my job is hard to describe" and "my job is the only job that's hard to describe" and the first claim I've seen of the latter is the very post I'm replying to.
You're clearly not a programmer, as you lack the ability to read nuance. I may or may not be able to pour concrete or get a wall frame to stand and stay plumb, both of which I'd need to be able to do as a builder, but I also don't interject comments into discussions about building to point out my own ignorance on the subject.
Probably because I actually can do -- and have done -- those things.
I'm guessing, though, from your overbearing demeanor, that you're an architectural or structural engineer, and not one of the guys who actually builds the shit; in which case, we're back on the subject of nuance. You've made yourself sound, to the lay person, like you pour concrete and erect walls for a living.
That's the difference between what I do and what you do: I must respect nuance.
To be fair, he's offering creimer a bit of entertainment and the opportunity (which he takes, of course) to be the bigger man and not shoot back. Kind of similar to how my pet trolls entertain me; but I prefer to feed mine, it keeps them around longer.
How about a pock-metal (cast cheap tin alloy) tension bracket for a clutch? Or how about a transmission shaft with half the shaft milled out with sharp 90 degree edges for 4 inches of its length? Both of those were stellar examples of really bad engineering.
Someone clearly weighed the potential repair income against the likelihood of an injury-or-death-causing catastrophic failure and decided they could make a ton of money.
The start of the end for consumer-driven product design, I'm afraid.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, there's plenty of innovation coming from Apple engineers, just as there's always been. The problem is that Jobs is no longer there to tell them when their ideas are complete shit, so it all gets released. It seems like all someone at Apple has to do to get approval for their pet project under Cook is dangle the promise of a dollar in front of him.
Someone doesn't understand the difference between long term success and nabbing a nice golden parachute on their way out the door of the company they just sunk, I think.
Please give specific example of what a Windows phone can't do right now.
Have more than 2 years of remaining vendor support and an app store that hasn't mostly stopped seeing updates to major apps.
Oh, wait, you asked for one; sorry, that was two, one of which was actually an issue raised by a Lumia 950 owner elsewhere in the thread Of course, you provided a few of your own: still hold a charge, USB Host Mode, connect to LTE networks, and properly render web pages (to which I'll add: run browsers that aren't using Edge's rendering and JS engines).
I don't disagree that picking a Windows phone now isn't the best choice for most people. But you come off as a jackass.
Well, that certainly is one way of looking at it, and perhaps you're right. Or, perhaps I simply grew weary of having to defend my position against someone who doesn't understand how to weigh options, risks, and advantages is various choices, y'know?
Most successful people I know weigh options, risks, and advantages of various choices and don't make sweeping generalizations...
Indeed, and this particular option carries the risk (a guarantee, actually) of lacking long-term support and a rapidly-degrading experience if you actually intend to use it as a smartphone. There was no sweeping generalization made, I never said Windows Phone is a horrible platform or that no good hardware was ever made to run it; on the contrary, I said it was a platform with potential, run into the ground and abandoned by its creator. I actually have some love for the poor thing, honestly; I just think it's a bad idea to suggest it as an option to someone looking for a phone they've held onto for 9 years, given vendor support will be ending in 2 and the store is already massively degraded because no vendors want to spend the time and money to keep their apps updated on a dying platform.
but I'm an engineer who specializes in HPC so I could easily run with a different crowd than someone in IT support, web development or management/business.
I see, an egotistical appeal to authority. What was it that you just said I was coming off as?
(I'd be willing to bet you fall into one of those three)
You could easily verify for yourself, but I'll save you the trouble. You're not entirely wrong; I actually cover two of the three, but that is not the sum total of my life experience, so it's hardly relevant here. Keep in mind that the management/business types are the whole reason you have a job in the first place; if we weren't successful, you'd be unemployed. Your high horse has a wounded knee.
Typewriters aren't what I'd call a dead platform. You can still buy them new, get manufacturer support, and find replacement parts and ink ribbons for them. Old doesn't mean dead.
Outdated but still effective for its intended purpose, yes. Windows phone is no longer effective for its intended purpose for most legitimate smartphone use cases; for many, it simply never was, in large part because Microsoft kept too tight of a grip on it and was too overbearing.
Successful people use what works and stick with it for as long as it will continue working for the foreseeable future so, yes, most of them do end up sticking with outdated (but still fully functional and, likely, supported by someone) tech. But those same successful people get off of dead platforms (and I'm not simply speaking in terms of phones here) as quickly as possible once they learn of the platform's impending demise.
We're half a year into Windows Phone being at that stage in its lifecycle; nobody with a propensity for making successful life choices is choosing to use it at this point.
Sure, if you've got nothing else going on.
Got a citation for that? I mean, if there's any truth to that at all, perhaps the rendering engine team need to do the UI as well.
They also didn't tie their thoughts and activities to dying platforms or ideas. I think you missed that point in my post.
As long as the camera works, I'd say keep it for that; I kept an old feature phone that had an excellent 2MP camera with proper OIS and autofocus, simply because it still made for better prints than 4 and 5MP cameras that were available on phones until just a few years ago. I've got nothing against using what works for you, or sticking with the dying platform because you're already there, of course; that would just be silly. It sounds like you might already be considering other options at this point, anyway.
Hopefully, the camera functionality will keep working after MS fully drops support, because yes, the cameras on those phones are incredible and it would be sad to see them just break because some company, not even the manufacturer, flipped a switch.
If all you use is the features that come with the phone and maybe a handful of free apps, more power to you, have at it. If you really want to keep using a device that's a year or more out of support (there are only 2 years left, remember), especially running a Microsoft OS with no security patches, go right ahead. Sure, it'll "work", it'll power on and at least the default functionality will probably be there; if you ever need to restore after they kill support, your apps will be lost, of course. I wouldn't really consider simply turning on and booting to be "working", when the device is intended to do so much more than that and those functions will necessarily break when Microsoft quits supporting them.
If you use any apps, you clearly haven't considered that you might need some time to find suitable replacements, or you really don't actually use them enough to care about potential substantial workflow changes. Having migrated from Blackberry to iOS to Android, I've been around the block a couple times; if you have some app that does some function a certain way, it takes time to sift through all the available apps on your new platform that perform that function, in order to find one that has the options you need and works the way you need it to.
Again, though, if all you care about is the most basic of functionality, sure, stick with Windows Phone. That's all you'll have when MS pulls the plug and, really, you don't even need a smartphone for those functions; most feature phones will perform those tasks, including GPS now, with multiple days of battery life.
For someone who actually uses a smartphone as a smartphone, adopting a dead platform is simply beyond idiotic and suggesting it as an option is either ignorant, malicious, or both.
What in the fuck are you talking about? "Hopes and dreams?" I'm talking about a phone.
I'm talking about behavior patterns of intelligent and successful individuals, and adopting a dead platform is not one of those patterns.
You're going to have to switch platforms in 2 years, one way or the other. End of life is when you start moving off of a platform, not when you adopt it; the 2.5 years of "support" Microsoft has pledged Windows phone is intended to allow current users enough time to migrate to another solution.
Because the smartest and most successful people in history have all tied their hopes and dreams to a dead horse to achieve greatness, right?
So much better that Microsoft has dropped the platform altogether. Bravo.
It had potential, don't get me wrong; and if Microsoft hadn't screwed every single pooch they encountered on their journey with Windows Phone, I'm sure it would be a real winner, but...
Its dead, Jim.
Other than it crashing -- and taking the whole browser down with it, with no warning or error message -- all the freakin' time, you're right. Nothing wrong with it at all.
Mind you, this was while on the phone with an Office 365 support rep, trying to sort out an account issue, while he was remotely viewing my screen. That is, the page crashing it was on a Microsoft site. After 5 crashes, the rep suggested we switch to Chrome and I pointed out that I was using Firefox at the beginning of the call for a reason.
A fine browser, indeed.
I pretty much explain it in the last paragraph. I didn't think I had to spell it out step by step here on Slashdot, but I was apparently wrong. A company's market share grows when more people buy their products relative to the growth of their competitors; to grow a company, the market must begin to favor them over competitors.
It's economics 101 and completely obvious to any 5 year old with a long enough attention span to have learned how to read and type. I really can't believe I had to explain it.
I won't get into an argument over whether you're right about that or not, but I will say we can work to make that point entirely irrelevant. If we work to give AMD and Intel roughly equal market share, then start propping VIA up until we have 3 equal players (VIA could catch up in performance and power efficiency with some funding; they've got the engineering capabilities, they simply lack funding). As each of the smaller players gets bigger, the bigger player gets smaller; we begin opening the door for a fourth serious player, then a fifth, and so on.
If AMD and Intel are both compromised in the market, and let's go ahead and assume they are for the purpose of this discussion, the correct response is to redistribute market share in a way that shrinks the biggest players and makes room for new players who may not be compromised.
Since VIA is not an option for the typical desktop or workstation user, and there are no other players, that means growing AMD even if they're also compromised, simply to shrink Intel. Then, we start growing VIA for lower-power needs, until they're able to catch up in performance-per-watt; then we grow them to be Intel and AMD's equals. We show other foundries that there is room to grow in the x86 market, they step up, we grow them, then we win.
Yes, the risk in that metaphor is that of revealing a truth about programming. That is, some people like to code instinctively, as well... As for self-evident or situational steps, we have libraries that give us those. As for baking a cake: you gotta do the cooking by the book, you know you can't be lazy.
Y'know, there's a big difference between "my job is hard to describe" and "my job is the only job that's hard to describe" and the first claim I've seen of the latter is the very post I'm replying to.
You're clearly not a programmer, as you lack the ability to read nuance. I may or may not be able to pour concrete or get a wall frame to stand and stay plumb, both of which I'd need to be able to do as a builder, but I also don't interject comments into discussions about building to point out my own ignorance on the subject.
Probably because I actually can do -- and have done -- those things.
I'm guessing, though, from your overbearing demeanor, that you're an architectural or structural engineer, and not one of the guys who actually builds the shit; in which case, we're back on the subject of nuance. You've made yourself sound, to the lay person, like you pour concrete and erect walls for a living.
That's the difference between what I do and what you do: I must respect nuance.
"You can't tell me not to murder because you won't take financial responsibility for my decision to get raped."
Because that's always a choice someone makes, right?
I haven't seen blinders that work that well in a while; what brand are they and where can I buy a pair?
Bah, I meant to post this in reply to rfengr's comment...
Ever been here? I used to think the same when I lived in the northeast region of the country, but it just ain't true.
A single state still comes out ahead of an entire first-world country. Your point?
You don't need a new one each time, they're good for 2 years, after which your vision is likely to have changed significantly.
To be fair, he's offering creimer a bit of entertainment and the opportunity (which he takes, of course) to be the bigger man and not shoot back. Kind of similar to how my pet trolls entertain me; but I prefer to feed mine, it keeps them around longer.
How about a pock-metal (cast cheap tin alloy) tension bracket for a clutch? Or how about a transmission shaft with half the shaft milled out with sharp 90 degree edges for 4 inches of its length? Both of those were stellar examples of really bad engineering.
Someone clearly weighed the potential repair income against the likelihood of an injury-or-death-causing catastrophic failure and decided they could make a ton of money.
The start of the end for consumer-driven product design, I'm afraid.