Microsoft announced Tuesday that hardware equipped with Windows Mobile 6.5, its latest smartphone platform to compete with Apple's iPhone, will be available to consumers on Oct. 6.
I'd be more impressed with both Apple and Microsoft if they'd get together and offer syncing for Windows Mobile phones with OS X.....
And to add insult to injury, OS X knows it's connecting to a Windows Mobile smartphone, it just turns up its nose and refuses to have a conversation.
Apple and Microsoft need to get over their schoolyard macho and make their products work together. "It just works" should apply to Windows Mobile phones.
In other words..... "I am cheap but I want the best... Why can't microsoft make Apple give me great stuff .... cheap!!"
Just a thought,,,, but maybe there is a reason why Apple costs more... its worth it. On the other hand,,, MS just likes to take your money. :-)
MS is missing the 'halo' effect that Apple is able to engender with its customers...get an iPod, love it-look at MacBooks and vice versa. Same with iPhones. People like the Apple 'eco-system.'
One gets a creaky Dell laptop with a clunky MS OS and one is not really motivated to get a Dell MP3 player or Dell Phone. Until MS can make game changing products I'm afraid they will just steadily lose ground.
Or, it could go the way it did in the early 1990s for PCs? Apple had a larger market share for Macs at this time than it does now for iPhones, but Microsoft's strategy of making the OS and selling to run on hardware from multiple vendors eventually led to Microsoft's near monopoly for it's OS software.
Ummmmm.....not to poke a hole in your theory, but hasn't that been their approach for like the last 9+ years since WinMo (err, excuse me Pocket PC) came out? Phones are a wholly different beast than PCs in my opinion.
In other words..... "I am cheap but I want the best... Why can't microsoft make Apple give me great stuff .... cheap!!"
Just a thought,,,, but maybe there is a reason why Apple costs more... its worth it. On the other hand,,, MS just likes to take your money. :-)
Just a thought.
en
Good points, as you say, value does not always equate to being the cheapest price!
I don't think most people understand how much time and resources Apple has invested to make the products they offer.
As an example, it takes Toyota 300 man years to design an upgraded model of a Camry! That's just the upgrade. Never mind an entirely new model. Astonishing.
I wonder how many hours were needed to introduce SL or the iPhone?\
Or, it could go the way it did in the early 1990s for PCs? Apple had a larger market share for Macs at this time than it does now for iPhones, but Microsoft's strategy of making the OS and selling to run on hardware from multiple vendors eventually led to Microsoft's near monopoly for it's OS software.
Now, almost 20 years later, Microsoft seems to be trying the same strategy again. If the OS for mobile phones is "good enough" for the average person and runs on cheaper hardware available from multiple vendors, this strategy could work again.
Apple does have a few advantages this time though. Mainly, the App Store is a huge competitive advantage. And, these mobile phones are sold with a carrier subsidy that makes the price of the iPhone as competitive as for a premium Windows Mobile phone. In fact, Apple has a huge advantage at this point in there ability to manufacture the iPhone so cheaply that the price of a subsidized phone could be zero and Apple would still make a nice profit. But, in the early 90s, Apple stubbornly held onto its high margins and rapidly lost market share. Advertising and branding can only go so far in a competitive market place where price will rule once the item becomes a commodity.
I would agree with the argument except for the fact that unlike a PC I am locked in to what a wireless vendor is willing to subsidize and sell.
I had been a strong MS mobile user for years (starting when Palm tanked) and now am on a Blackberry (Work uses Lotus Notes - barf) and MS Mobile consistently is the most expensive OS to license.
MS has never been known for being UI friendly - ever. They tried and failed miserably with their "Bob" release way back in the late 80's.
They don't control the hardware so who knows what that quality will be like...
To your point though... Apple has to continue to innovate and continue to push limits if it wants to lead. Palm sat on top of the hill and basically, like MS, did nothing to their OS for years only to watch MS push it off the hill. Apple needs to be mindful of that lesson and I think should seriously think about how it can maintain it's edge (has anyone used the term "background processing" in this thread yet?)
It's insane how everyone copied Apple's aqua glass look starting in 2000, and has kept copying the evolution of it--currently glossy black for instance. And always with the same style of highlight and shading. You could say that there only IS one way to draw something glassy, or glossy, or whatever. But that's not quite the case. Companies could copy the "idea" of glassy or glossy and still not copy the specific look SO blatantly (in places, not everywhere).
This is however an OS that could fit the bill in terms of "good enough/cheap enough" and its free: Android.
Except for the fact it ain't free. How does Google make $$$??? Ads. So they flood you with ad spam. They also sell your information in a round about way in targeted advertising. What we are talking about here is subsidization. Personally, I'd rather pay the upfront blood money and not have to deal with the cost of the subsidy. Just like I would not want to buy a PC with bloatware (again subsidized). Linux and Wikipedia are free, anything Google is not.
Because MS doesn't own or control it's own hardware and because there are numerous wireless vendors in the mix, the only way that a consumer will actually see and get to "benefit" from the new OS is AFTER the hardware vendor allows the update and AFTER the wireless vendor allows it on their system.
More typical; you'll see an announcement from, say HTC, that there is a *new* device with this OS on it. Then, about 6 months later (meaning around FEB 2010) someone like SPRINT or ATT will announce this *new* smartphone.
It will be a while before Joe and Jane consumer have this in their hands.
It's insane how everyone copied Apple's aqua glass look starting in 2000, and has kept copying the evolution of it
It started with the original multi-colored iMacs. Everyone who made any kind of product was making them in candy-colors, from kitchen gadgets to cellphones. Apple seems to be the trend-setter in gadget design.
Late to the party as per usual, let the others set the trends and take the risk and we ll do the inferior copy afterwards...these guys used to embarrass the whole computer industry, right now they just manage to embarrass themselves...they used to bring some crumbs to the table, now they are the poster child for pathetic and soon they 'll be the case in point at management schools of how imbecilic decisions and the lack of any vision whatsoever can bring down the biggest corporate giant ever to appear on this globe.
if you want to see a 1984 mouse, just google it-did you not know about the 128K Mac?
ITS NOT ABOUT YOU, its about Douglas Engelbart and how Microsoft has stolen all his work and has never implemented it properly anyway. At least Apple paid something for. And Andy Hertzfield and others modified it to make it more artistic and better for plain folk to create cool stuff.
You said you've been using the same mouse since 1984 or something. I wanted to see it hooked up to a modern computer. It would be a funny picture.
What is really troubling, is MS' usual spin on their own products.
Interestingly enough, we discovered that most people who carry a Windows phone don’t realize it’s running Windows Mobile.
That's pretty embarrassing. Why even admit that??
And lastly, we move right along to the confusion this will cause developers.
One thing that was very clear after all these conversations about phones is that there is no “one size fits all” in this market. On Oct. 6th, you’ll see new Windows phones designed for a variety of tastes, needs and price points — with or without keyboards, with or without touch screens, as well as your choice of GPS, accelerometer and high resolution camera.
That's right, don't simplify.
In other words . . . same old approach, but with twice the confusion.
The proof is in the pudding. MS has no concept whatesoever of how to effectively, easily, and tastefully serve the consumer market. They've had two years to get their ish together, and they're still finding ways to justify their failure to keep up.
I'd take Apple's "walled garden" of arrogance over MS' incompetent rebranding of junk any day.
What is really troubling, is MS' usual spin on their own products.
Interestingly enough, we discovered that most people who carry a Windows phone don’t realize it’s running Windows Mobile.
That's pretty embarrassing. Why even admit that??
And lastly, we move right along to the confusion this will cause developers.
One thing that was very clear after all these conversations about phones is that there is no “one size fits all” in this market. On Oct. 6th, you’ll see new Windows phones designed for a variety of tastes, needs and price points — with or without keyboards, with or without touch screens, as well as your choice of GPS, accelerometer and high resolution camera.
That's right, don't simplify.
In other words . . . same old approach, but with twice the confusion.
The proof is in the pudding. MS has no concept whatesoever of how to effectively, easily, and tastefully serve the consumer market. They've had two years to get their ish together, and they're still finding ways to justify their failure to keep up.
I'd take Apple's "walled garden" of arrogance over MS' incompetent rebranding of junk any day.
Well said.
I seem to remember a previous post from a rather lucid poster...it will be another 'ipod-like bloodbath!'
Practically every touch screen cell phone company out there is copying Apple. It really is amazing that high-paid designers can't come up with something more original. I see these cell phone commercials and about 3 or 4 seconds in I realize it's not an iPhone. Come on people, where is the challenge?
Comments
Microsoft announced Tuesday that hardware equipped with Windows Mobile 6.5, its latest smartphone platform to compete with Apple's iPhone, will be available to consumers on Oct. 6.
OK not very intelligent BUT Muaaaaaah Ha Ha
I'd be more impressed with both Apple and Microsoft if they'd get together and offer syncing for Windows Mobile phones with OS X.....
And to add insult to injury, OS X knows it's connecting to a Windows Mobile smartphone, it just turns up its nose and refuses to have a conversation.
Apple and Microsoft need to get over their schoolyard macho and make their products work together. "It just works" should apply to Windows Mobile phones.
In other words..... "I am cheap but I want the best... Why can't microsoft make Apple give me great stuff .... cheap!!"
Just a thought,,,, but maybe there is a reason why Apple costs more... its worth it. On the other hand,,, MS just likes to take your money. :-)
Just a thought.
en
One gets a creaky Dell laptop with a clunky MS OS and one is not really motivated to get a Dell MP3 player or Dell Phone. Until MS can make game changing products I'm afraid they will just steadily lose ground.
Or, it could go the way it did in the early 1990s for PCs? Apple had a larger market share for Macs at this time than it does now for iPhones, but Microsoft's strategy of making the OS and selling to run on hardware from multiple vendors eventually led to Microsoft's near monopoly for it's OS software.
Ummmmm.....not to poke a hole in your theory, but hasn't that been their approach for like the last 9+ years since WinMo (err, excuse me Pocket PC) came out? Phones are a wholly different beast than PCs in my opinion.
In other words..... "I am cheap but I want the best... Why can't microsoft make Apple give me great stuff .... cheap!!"
Just a thought,,,, but maybe there is a reason why Apple costs more... its worth it. On the other hand,,, MS just likes to take your money. :-)
Just a thought.
en
Good points, as you say, value does not always equate to being the cheapest price!
I don't think most people understand how much time and resources Apple has invested to make the products they offer.
As an example, it takes Toyota 300 man years to design an upgraded model of a Camry! That's just the upgrade. Never mind an entirely new model. Astonishing.
I wonder how many hours were needed to introduce SL or the iPhone?
Or, it could go the way it did in the early 1990s for PCs? Apple had a larger market share for Macs at this time than it does now for iPhones, but Microsoft's strategy of making the OS and selling to run on hardware from multiple vendors eventually led to Microsoft's near monopoly for it's OS software.
Now, almost 20 years later, Microsoft seems to be trying the same strategy again. If the OS for mobile phones is "good enough" for the average person and runs on cheaper hardware available from multiple vendors, this strategy could work again.
Apple does have a few advantages this time though. Mainly, the App Store is a huge competitive advantage. And, these mobile phones are sold with a carrier subsidy that makes the price of the iPhone as competitive as for a premium Windows Mobile phone. In fact, Apple has a huge advantage at this point in there ability to manufacture the iPhone so cheaply that the price of a subsidized phone could be zero and Apple would still make a nice profit. But, in the early 90s, Apple stubbornly held onto its high margins and rapidly lost market share. Advertising and branding can only go so far in a competitive market place where price will rule once the item becomes a commodity.
I would agree with the argument except for the fact that unlike a PC I am locked in to what a wireless vendor is willing to subsidize and sell.
I had been a strong MS mobile user for years (starting when Palm tanked) and now am on a Blackberry (Work uses Lotus Notes - barf) and MS Mobile consistently is the most expensive OS to license.
MS has never been known for being UI friendly - ever. They tried and failed miserably with their "Bob" release way back in the late 80's.
They don't control the hardware so who knows what that quality will be like...
To your point though... Apple has to continue to innovate and continue to push limits if it wants to lead. Palm sat on top of the hill and basically, like MS, did nothing to their OS for years only to watch MS push it off the hill. Apple needs to be mindful of that lesson and I think should seriously think about how it can maintain it's edge (has anyone used the term "background processing" in this thread yet?)
It's insane how everyone copied Apple's aqua glass look starting in 2000, and has kept copying the evolution of it--currently glossy black for instance. And always with the same style of highlight and shading. You could say that there only IS one way to draw something glassy, or glossy, or whatever. But that's not quite the case. Companies could copy the "idea" of glassy or glossy and still not copy the specific look SO blatantly (in places, not everywhere).
It is almost shameless sometimes isn't it?
This is however an OS that could fit the bill in terms of "good enough/cheap enough" and its free: Android.
Except for the fact it ain't free. How does Google make $$$??? Ads. So they flood you with ad spam. They also sell your information in a round about way in targeted advertising. What we are talking about here is subsidization. Personally, I'd rather pay the upfront blood money and not have to deal with the cost of the subsidy. Just like I would not want to buy a PC with bloatware (again subsidized). Linux and Wikipedia are free, anything Google is not.
More typical; you'll see an announcement from, say HTC, that there is a *new* device with this OS on it. Then, about 6 months later (meaning around FEB 2010) someone like SPRINT or ATT will announce this *new* smartphone.
It will be a while before Joe and Jane consumer have this in their hands.
It's insane how everyone copied Apple's aqua glass look starting in 2000, and has kept copying the evolution of it
It started with the original multi-colored iMacs. Everyone who made any kind of product was making them in candy-colors, from kitchen gadgets to cellphones. Apple seems to be the trend-setter in gadget design.
if you want to see a 1984 mouse, just google it-did you not know about the 128K Mac?
ITS NOT ABOUT YOU, its about Douglas Engelbart and how Microsoft has stolen all his work and has never implemented it properly anyway. At least Apple paid something for. And Andy Hertzfield and others modified it to make it more artistic and better for plain folk to create cool stuff.
You said you've been using the same mouse since 1984 or something. I wanted to see it hooked up to a modern computer. It would be a funny picture.
WM7 is considered "Premium"?? Uh..oh... once again M$ is going to dilute another buzzword.
You mean like they diluted the term "Innovate"?
I'm having a hard time imagining what a new release of Windows Mobile would look like... wait, >bonk< silly me, I have an iPhone in my pocket.
You said you've been using the same mouse since 1984 or something. I wanted to see it hooked up to a modern computer. It would be a funny picture.
The man said he's been using an apple mouse with precision since 1984, ANY apple mouse.
If you want a funny picture try sticking a zune to a pc, and for maximum laughs stick it to a mac.
You mean like they diluted the term "Innovate"?
I'm having a hard time imagining what a new release of Windows Mobile would look like... wait, >bonk< silly me, I have an iPhone in my pocket.
Interestingly enough, we discovered that most people who carry a Windows phone don’t realize it’s running Windows Mobile.
That's pretty embarrassing. Why even admit that??
And lastly, we move right along to the confusion this will cause developers.
One thing that was very clear after all these conversations about phones is that there is no “one size fits all” in this market. On Oct. 6th, you’ll see new Windows phones designed for a variety of tastes, needs and price points — with or without keyboards, with or without touch screens, as well as your choice of GPS, accelerometer and high resolution camera.
That's right, don't simplify.
In other words . . . same old approach, but with twice the confusion.
The proof is in the pudding. MS has no concept whatesoever of how to effectively, easily, and tastefully serve the consumer market. They've had two years to get their ish together, and they're still finding ways to justify their failure to keep up.
I'd take Apple's "walled garden" of arrogance over MS' incompetent rebranding of junk any day.
What is really troubling, is MS' usual spin on their own products.
Interestingly enough, we discovered that most people who carry a Windows phone don’t realize it’s running Windows Mobile.
That's pretty embarrassing. Why even admit that??
And lastly, we move right along to the confusion this will cause developers.
One thing that was very clear after all these conversations about phones is that there is no “one size fits all” in this market. On Oct. 6th, you’ll see new Windows phones designed for a variety of tastes, needs and price points — with or without keyboards, with or without touch screens, as well as your choice of GPS, accelerometer and high resolution camera.
That's right, don't simplify.
In other words . . . same old approach, but with twice the confusion.
The proof is in the pudding. MS has no concept whatesoever of how to effectively, easily, and tastefully serve the consumer market. They've had two years to get their ish together, and they're still finding ways to justify their failure to keep up.
I'd take Apple's "walled garden" of arrogance over MS' incompetent rebranding of junk any day.
Well said.
I seem to remember a previous post from a rather lucid poster...it will be another 'ipod-like bloodbath!'
Fan since my first Apple List II (still own it!)