That's taking my meaning too far in the opposite direction, but I do think the cloud definition is murky. Some people have taken to replacing the phrase "stored it on my online disk" with "stored it in the cloud"... yet in some cases nothing has changed.
I still think part of the definition is that you have all your data available to all your devices via an online storage area. So MobileMe accomplishes this to a degree - but if my iPhone died and I got a new one, I wouldn't be back up and running immediately via my MobileMe account. If my computer died I'd still be reliant on rebuilding, reinstalling apps, etc.
My entire setup is still locked to a device, rather than being device independent. Apple has most of the bits and pieces to make it possible for me to log into ANY Mac and have it configure my preferences, give me access to my data (documents, music, photos....), install my apps (if necessary), and pretty well have me up and running. To accomplish that would require some creative dancing between accessing online data, local syncs, temporary caching - to make it look like my whole system is available to me a minute after logging in.
I guess to me "the cloud" promises my computing ANYWHERE, but I see that as achievable without being all web based client computing.
My point is that the definition of "the cloud" is sufficiently vague that it's worth remembering that if we just say "the cloud" the other person might not understand what we mean by that specifically.
Yeah, that's true. I still think from what I've read, that the ultimate goal is everything on the web, but we may not get there for quite a while. At some point, it will seem normal. But we've got to take a few steps first.
Try using the "cloud" on shared 300 Kb/s down - 100 Kb/s up internet that is shared, and you'll see that for many people, the idea of cloud computing is next to impossible and local storage becomes paramount. Even watching videos on YouTube becomes a chore unless you have a decent Flash downloading and converting client so you can start the downloads and come back hours later to watch your videos.
As far as web browsing with iPhone OS version of Safari, I don't bother. The fact that it is incompatible with many, many websites makes it usable for only very limited web browsing. If there were other web browsers available for the iPhone OS I might use it to do more web browsing but Apple only allows their own web browser to be installed. As far as using different Apps for different websites, it is awkward to continually be opening and closing Apps simply to visit and use the content from different websites that a single, good web browser can do. So if I need to do any real web browsing / internet work, I open my MacBook.
This trend toward a closed model of computing that the iPhone / iPad represents is truly worrisome. If this is the future of computing, where the computer companies dictate to their customers what they can and can't install on their machines, I'd rather go back to pen and paper, public libraries, and real books.
Did they poll the exact same pool of people before AND after? If not then this really doesn't amount to much because you don't see the opinion shift within the same body.
In statistics it is called a sample. The question you should ask is how many people were asked before and after, not if they were the same.
Try using the "cloud" on shared 300 Kb/s down - 100 Kb/s up internet that is shared, and you'll see that for many people, the idea of cloud computing is next to impossible and local storage becomes paramount. Even watching videos on YouTube becomes a chore unless you have a decent Flash downloading and converting client so you can start the downloads and come back hours later to watch your videos.
As far as web browsing with iPhone OS version of Safari, I don't bother. The fact that it is incompatible with many, many websites makes it usable for only very limited web browsing. If there were other web browsers available for the iPhone OS I might use it to do more web browsing but Apple only allows their own web browser to be installed. As far as using different Apps for different websites, it is awkward to continually be opening and closing Apps simply to visit and use the content from different websites that a single, good web browser can do. So if I need to do any real web browsing / internet work, I open my MacBook.
This trend toward a closed model of computing that the iPhone / iPad represents is truly worrisome. If this is the future of computing, where the computer companies dictate to their customers what they can and can't install on their machines, I'd rather go back to pen and paper, public libraries, and real books.
Actually, browsing with Safari on the iPhone is great as long as you have a decent connection. The connection problem is the same with any browser on any mobile device, as they're all slow.
To everyone bitching about the ipad & iphone lack of flash support, MSFT is following Apple's lead and not supporting flash in windows mobile 7. Flash's days appear to be numbered..
It will be funny to watch Baller stumble through another keynote presentation tomorrow introducing mobile 7.
To everyone bitching about the ipad & iphone lack of flash support, MSFT is following Apple's lead and not supporting flash in windows mobile 7. Flash's days appear to be numbered..
It will be funny to watch Baller stumble through another keynote presentation tomorrow introducing mobile 7.
Windows Mobile 6.5.x is getting Flash 10.1 this Summer-ish.So I have a feeling that Windows Mobile 7 will be based off the Zune HD OS which uses a the new Windows Embedded CE 6.0, not the OS in their current phones, which is why I think Flash cann't be supported for the time.
There is also the possible that Flash 10.1 Beta for WinMo was transferable to WinMo7 but it made IE too sluggish. That is the official reason from Mozilla as to why they disabled Flash in Firefox Mobile on Maemo.
I look forward to MS' announcement and demo. This is the most exciting thing to come out of MS in a long time. Perhaps 3 years too late, but it looks like they are finally getting a keen focus for WinMo.
PS: I like the Zune and if the iPod didn't exist I'd have bought a Zune and I fully understand that if not for the iPod existing the Zune couldn't have copied the iPod. \
Windows Mobile 6.5.x is getting Flash 10.1 this Summer-ish.So I have a feeling that Windows Mobile 7 will be based off the Zune HD OS which uses a the new Windows Embedded CE 6.0, not the OS in their current phones, which is why I think Flash cann't be supported for the time.
There is also the possible that Flash 10.1 Beta for WinMo was transferable to WinMo7 but it made IE too sluggish. That is the official reason from Mozilla as to why they disabled Flash in Firefox Mobile on Maemo.
I look forward to MS' announcement and demo. This is the most exciting thing to come out of MS in a long time. Perhaps 3 years too late, but it looks like they are finally getting a keen focus for WinMo.
PS: I like the Zune and if the iPod didn't exist I'd have bought a Zune and I fully understand that if not for the iPod existing the Zune couldn't have copied the iPod. \
Of course, MS will prefer to support Silverlight over Flash anyway.
I'm curious s to whether the rumors of WM 7 not supporting multitasking any more than the current iPhone OS, is true. If so, they are going backwards, and their publicity over WM supporting it over the iPhone as an advantage will no longer be true. Also the new app store. That's copying Apple as well, and also negates their badmouthing Apple's method.
But if Apple does get MT in 40. It will be a reversal. I wonder how MS would handle that?
As far as the Zune goes. I've seen less than a handful here in NYC since it first came out. It's been plenty of time for it to have succeeded. It's failed. Quite honestly, other than some tech writers, I don't know of more than one person who bought one, and he did it just to be different. He's a friend of my daughters, and doesn't have a Zune anymore.
As the Zune has been so unpopular, I can't think of a single good reason why MS would want to Zunify WM 7. Two failures together just leads to one bigger failure. I can only imagine that it will serve to make WM 7 LESS popular.
Of course, MS will prefer to support Silverlight over Flash anyway.
I'm curious s to whether the rumors of WM 7 not supporting multitasking any more than the current iPhone OS, is true. If so, they are going backwards, and their publicity over WM supporting it over the iPhone as an advantage will no longer be true. Also the new app store. That's copying Apple as well, and also negates their badmouthing Apple's method.
But if Apple does get MT in 40. It will be a reversal. I wonder how MS would handle that?
As far as the Zune goes. I've seen less than a handful here in NYC since it first came out. It's been plenty of time for it to have succeeded. It's failed. Quite honestly, other than some tech writers, I don't know of more than one person who bought one, and he did it just to be different. He's a friend of my daughters, and doesn't have a Zune anymore.
As the Zune has been so unpopular, I can't think of a single good reason why MS would want to Zunify WM 7. Two failures together just leads to one bigger failure. I can only imagine that it will serve to make WM 7 LESS popular.
Zune is a failure in marketing and sales, but the OS is sound. When The Zune OS 2.0 was designed I was saying back then, likely on these forums, that MS should use it for a touch-based version of WinMo. I think this is a good move for MS. They are following Apple, according to the rumours, but it's a focus that could lead to some very real sales in the future.
PS: Not mentioned, syncing will also be done via the Zune software, like the iPhone with iTunes.
Zune is a failure in marketing and sales, but the OS is sound. When The Zune OS 2.0 was designed I was saying back then, likely on these forums, that MS should use it for a touch-based version of WinMo. I think this is a good move for MS. They are following Apple, according to the rumours, but it's a focus that could lead to some very real sales in the future.
PS: Not mentioned, syncing will also be done via the Zune software, like the iPhone with iTunes.
Now that we have a much better idea of what the phone will be like, after the intro at Barcalona, I'm sort of wondering what they're thinking.
I'm seing comments that while they seem to have added some pretty good things, the interface is a mess. From what I see, I agree. I hope for their sake, it's incomplete, because it looks half assed.
The rumors about it being incompatible with all the older software seems to be a boneheaded idea. Even Palm has an emulator.
It doesn't really matter if it's better that old WM. People simply aren't interested in a Zune-like device.
And earlier, when you said that if it weren't for the iPod, you might have bought a Zune, well, I was thinking about that statement, and found it funny.
If there was no iPod, there wouldn't have been a Zune either. So you wouldn't have had that choice.
Now that we have a much better idea of what the phone will be like, after the intro at Barcalona, I'm sort of wondering what they're thinking.
I'm seing comments that while they seem to have added some pretty good things, the interface is a mess. From what I see, I agree. I hope for their sake, it's incomplete, because it looks half assed.
The rumors about it being incompatible with all the older software seems to be a boneheaded idea. Even Palm has an emulator.
It doesn't really matter if it's better that old WM. People simply aren't interested in a Zune-like device.
It seems boneheaded, but I do agree with them start small and focused, which seems to be what they are doing right now. I am pretty excited about WM7 as a real competitor and think the October timeframe is a great time for a release if we assume the next iPhone will be arriving in the Summer. I don't expect the sales to be anywhere near the iPhone or Android-based devices, but I think it can be a player. We still compare and contrast to WebOS and it's sales are lower than I'd expect from a WM7 phone.
Quote:
And earlier, when you said that if it weren't for the iPod, you might have bought a Zune, well, I was thinking about that statement, and found it funny.
If there was no iPod, there wouldn't have been a Zune either. So you wouldn't have had that choice.
I've stated that before. I really do like much about the Zune, though usually when I make that statement I do note that the Zune wouldn't exist with the iPod. I guess I didn't on the post you read.
It seems boneheaded, but I do agree with them start small and focused, which seems to be what they are doing right now. I am pretty excited about WM7 as a real competitor and think the October timeframe is a great time for a release if we assume the next iPhone will be arriving in the Summer. I don't expect the sales to be anywhere near the iPhone or Android-based devices, but I think it can be a player. We still compare and contrast to WebOS and it's sales are lower than I'd expect from a WM7 phone.
The problem is that the market isn't was it was when the iPhone first appeared. It's now much more developed, with four new competitors that didn't exist early 2007. Apple, Android, Palm WebOS, and Nokia's Memeo, and soon to be appearing, Samsung's Bada.
Where will this fit it?
All of these platforms except Bada, have at least 1,000 apps, and most have tens of thousands, including Blackberry.
By the time W Phone 7 comes out, they will all have a lot more. This isn't good for MS as far as its competitiveness goes. How are they going to advertise that?
Remember what WM is aimed at now. Business. It's done well there because of its business apps, security, compatibility with MS's systems, etc. They're giving a lot of that up with this, to pursue the consumer market. To me, it's a mistake. They should have given up on that, and made it a much stronger competitor to RIM in the business market. Now, I'm certain that they'll lose much of those business customers.
All the people who have depended on certain business applications won't have them. Will those developers take a chance on the new platform? It's a good guess. With RIM coming up strong, and Apple coming up stronger, and with both of those companies with strong sales into the business market, there's a good chance those developers, or a large group of them, will leave MS and move to the others with proven sales. It's a circular spiral downward. Without the apps, loss of sales. Without the sales, loss of apps. We've seen it on the Mac platform during the late '90's through the early '00's.
And what about the loss of full multitasking? I suppose MS thought that if Apple could get away with it, they could as well. But it will be bad for their business markets where it's expected. It's also funny, because it's one area in which MS has blasted Apple about that they actually had an advantage, whatever the performance.
And really, what happens if Apple DOES introduce full multitasking with 4.0? How does marketing address that?
The whole thing is screwy.
Quote:
I've stated that before. I really do like much about the Zune, though usually when I make that statement I do note that the Zune wouldn't exist with the iPod. I guess I didn't on the post you read.
I just looked back, and you did. I didn't remember it.
The problem is that the market isn't was it was when the iPhone first appeared. It's now much more developed, with four new competitors that didn't exist early 2007. Apple, Android, Palm WebOS, and Nokia's Memeo, and soon to be appearing, Samsung's Bada.
Where will this fit it?
All of these platforms except Bada, have at least 1,000 apps, and most have tens of thousands, including Blackberry.
By the time W Phone 7 comes out, they will all have a lot more. This isn't good for MS as far as its competitiveness goes. How are they going to advertise that?
Remember what WM is aimed at now. Business. It's done well there because of its business apps, security, compatibility with MS's systems, etc. They're giving a lot of that up with this, to pursue the consumer market. To me, it's a mistake. They should have given up on that, and made it a much stronger competitor to RIM in the business market. Now, I'm certain that they'll lose much of those business customers.
All the people who have depended on certain business applications won't have them. Will those developers take a chance on the new platform? It's a good guess. With RIM coming up strong, and Apple coming up stronger, and with both of those companies with strong sales into the business market, there's a good chance those developers, or a large group of them, will leave MS and move to the others with proven sales. It's a circular spiral downward. Without the apps, loss of sales. Without the sales, loss of apps. We've seen it on the Mac platform during the late '90's through the early '00's.
And what about the loss of full multitasking? I suppose MS thought that if Apple could get away with it, they could as well. But it will be bad for their business markets where it's expected. It's also funny, because it's one area in which MS has blasted Apple about that they actually had an advantage, whatever the performance.
And really, what happens if Apple DOES introduce full multitasking with 4.0? How does marketing address that?
The whole thing is screwy.
I agree with everything you've said but other option do they have if they want to stay in their market? The biggest problem (and I mean big) is the shear lateness to this party but putting that aside the rest seems pretty good.
The only thing I may have waited on, at this point, is when I revealed specifics of my OS and UI. We have rapid development of Android with the community quickly Borging any good ideas and the iPhone Os 4.0 demo likely a month away with plenty of development coming for the 3 months following, ready to take anything clever MS might offer, like strong social networking features. I'd have just teased with built up anticipation until about a month after the iPhone is released and no longer a surprise. I'd have an WM7 SDK ready at that time because then the interest would be high, but I'd definitely be released before the OS goes live, unlike what Palm did with WebOS on that front.
I'll reserve judgement until the actually have a shipping process. A lot can happen in 8 months. I think MS needed to make a clean break from WinMo, it was just too old,
The primary problem is that MS should have done this years ago. They don't have much time to position WP7. They are already way behind in several ways.
MS needs to get as many developers as possible on board and ship with a full slate of apps. Otherwise it will be extremely difficult to build developer momentum.
MS really needs the Zune OS on their tablets. But with this being MS they will figure that out after Apple and Google dominate the tablet market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Now that we have a much better idea of what the phone will be like, after the intro at Barcalona, I'm sort of wondering what they're thinking.
I'm seing comments that while they seem to have added some pretty good things, the interface is a mess. From what I see, I agree. I hope for their sake, it's incomplete, because it looks half assed.
The rumors about it being incompatible with all the older software seems to be a boneheaded idea. Even Palm has an emulator.
It doesn't really matter if it's better that old WM. People simply aren't interested in a Zune-like device.
I agree with everything you've said but other option do they have if they want to stay in their market? The biggest problem (and I mean big) is the shear lateness to this party but putting that aside the rest seems pretty good.
The problem for them is that their market isn't the consumer, it's business. And they're moving away from that, and pretty sharply. They're trying to move in a different direction than before, and I'm not so sure they have too much of a chance there. Really, what can they offer that isn't being offered? They may arrange things somewhat differently, but the services are no different that what's being offered elsewhere.
And, as you say, if Apple has a more social networked OS, then even that won't help them. No one else is standing still, and without apps or anything else to really stand out, they'll get lost. That's why I said they should have stuck to their hard core users; business people, and strengthened their offerings.
Quote:
The only thing I may have waited on, at this point, is when I revealed specifics of my OS and UI. We have rapid development of Android with the community quickly Borging any good ideas and the iPhone Os 4.0 demo likely a month away with plenty of development coming for the 3 months following, ready to take anything clever MS might offer, like strong social networking features. I'd have just teased with built up anticipation until about a month after the iPhone is released and no longer a surprise. I'd have an WM7 SDK ready at that time because then the interest would be high, but I'd definitely be released before the OS goes live, unlike what Palm did with WebOS on that front.
Well, I believe that Palm thought that if they waited until after Apple, they would have gotten lost in the rush. But, from my perspective in business, and advertising, that was a blunder. They should have waited 6 months. That would have been right in the middle of the iPhone's life, when things are at a lull. Then they would have been able to get more publicity on a more sustained basis, and possibly could have finished the SDK. At this point in history, not having an SDK finished in time to have a decent number of new apps available the first day of the phone's release is almost suicide.
It does no good for people to say that Apple didn't have one for a full year. Times were different, and the iPhone was so compelling on its own, that it sold very well anyway. Once the SDK came out, there was a ready customer base to sell into. And of course, complementing the phone was the Touch, adding another 6 to 8 million customers for most of the apps. So there was about 20+ million people ready for apps, which took off right away, with a well thought out SDK and store.
Palm had neither.
What to make of the MS offering? When will the SDK be available? What about a simulator? I didn't see any info about that, but it had better be by the summer.
Also, what's with the store? I can't tell if it will be the only way to get apps, or just the way to get certified apps. If the former, then they've Appleified even more - again.
Whatever happens with it, there won't be many customers for the software for some time.
I'll reserve judgement until the actually have a shipping process. A lot can happen in 8 months. I think MS needed to make a clean break from WinMo, it was just too old,
The primary problem is that MS should have done this years ago. They don't have much time to position WP7. They are already way behind in several ways.
MS needs to get as many developers as possible on board and ship with a full slate of apps. Otherwise it will be extremely difficult to build developer momentum.
MS really needs the Zune OS on their tablets. But with this being MS they will figure that out after Apple and Google dominate the tablet market.
I think they're taking a big chance with what they've done. I don't know if they're aware of it, or they're so convinced they have a winner that it hasn't crossed their minds. They thought they had a winner with the Zune line, but were hedging their bets by not making predictions on how many they would sell. They don't release sales figures either. The numbers have to be figured out.
I'm curious as to how much under the hood work is almost ready. The word has been that they are falling behind, and it may not arrive until early 2011. We all know that MS is optimistic, but they revise release dates back. They've been doing that with this.
If they miss the holiday, they will miss a big chance. It's interesting that Apple releases the iPods for the holiday season, but the phone in the "dead" of summer. A phone isn't supposed to be a holiday gift, but it is.
The other question is about those developers. How many will actually produce apps, as opposed to mouthing their support, blah, blah, blah. A lot of developers are stretched thin these days. There were never so many competing application platforms as now. How many can they address? Without a single phone sold, will developers rush in, or wait it out until they see how the phone is doing? If the latter, that could kill it. What about all their business developmental partners? This is a totally new, unproven OS with unknown phones. Will they be looking askance at MS and towards Apple and RIM, if they aren't already doing so?
Yes I'd raised this issue last year when the Palm Pre was supposed to destroy the iPhone. Developers are not going to be able to develop a native app for all of these different phones. The platform currently in place to be the great equalizer between all of these different phones is the web.
HTML5 and web apps are the most practical way to deliver content to all of these different phones at once. Its easier to adjust the UI on a web app for each phone than write and support an entirely different native app.
MS appears to even be making this difficult for themselves as WP7 will ship with IE, which does not appear to have any intent to fully support HTML5.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
The other question is about those developers. How many will actually produce apps, as opposed to mouthing their support, blah, blah, blah. A lot of developers are stretched thin these days. There were never so many competing application platforms as now. How many can they address? Without a single phone sold, will developers rush in, or wait it out until they see how the phone is doing? If the latter, that could kill it. What about all their business developmental partners? This is a totally new, unproven OS with unknown phones. Will they be looking askance at MS and towards Apple and RIM, if they aren't already doing so?
MS appears to even be making this difficult for themselves as WP7 will ship with IE, which does not appear to have any intent to fully support HTML5.
Mozilla has recently released Firefox Mobile for a single device. If they can't get a decent browser built for a mobile platform I have doubts MS can with IE in any decent timeframe.
Yes I'd raised this issue last year when the Palm Pre was supposed to destroy the iPhone. Developers are not going to be able to develop a native app for all of these different phones. The platform currently in place to be the great equalizer between all of these different phones is the web.
HTML5 and web apps are the most practical way to deliver content to all of these different phones at once. Its easier to adjust the UI on a web app for each phone than write and support an entirely different native app.
MS appears to even be making this difficult for themselves as WP7 will ship with IE, which does not appear to have any intent to fully support HTML5.
The one thing MS has is plenty of money, and the willingness to lose plenty of it in pursuit of its goals. We can look to the X Box and see how that works. They've lost an estimated 8 billion on the entertainment division since the X Box first appeared, but it didn't do anything to dissuade them to not give it up as every other company in the world would have. Same thing with their internet initiatives, billions lost there as well.
Palm has no billions to lose. If their sales don't perk up remarkably, or are bought out, they will go under.
So MS will likely keep plodding along if this doesn't turn successful. Eventually, they will gather developers and sales. That's what happens with monopoly software profits with a locked in market.
Does that mean Webkit is the best option for developing a good mobile web browser? You see the new browser for BlackBerry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Mozilla has recently released Firefox Mobile for a single device. If they can't get a decent browser built for a mobile platform I have doubts MS can with IE in any decent timeframe.
Mozilla has recently released Firefox Mobile for a single device. If they can't get a decent browser built for a mobile platform I have doubts MS can with IE in any decent timeframe.
As I just said to Teno, MS has virtually unlimited funds to pour into any project they want to push. Despite their not having the best software with all that money, they do manage to outlast many of their competitors. If Mozilla had more than a small fraction of the sums MS can ladle into this, they could have done more. Apple also doesn't use the infinite funding model on a project the way MS does, or Safari would be much better than it is.
Comments
That's taking my meaning too far in the opposite direction, but I do think the cloud definition is murky. Some people have taken to replacing the phrase "stored it on my online disk" with "stored it in the cloud"... yet in some cases nothing has changed.
I still think part of the definition is that you have all your data available to all your devices via an online storage area. So MobileMe accomplishes this to a degree - but if my iPhone died and I got a new one, I wouldn't be back up and running immediately via my MobileMe account. If my computer died I'd still be reliant on rebuilding, reinstalling apps, etc.
My entire setup is still locked to a device, rather than being device independent. Apple has most of the bits and pieces to make it possible for me to log into ANY Mac and have it configure my preferences, give me access to my data (documents, music, photos....), install my apps (if necessary), and pretty well have me up and running. To accomplish that would require some creative dancing between accessing online data, local syncs, temporary caching - to make it look like my whole system is available to me a minute after logging in.
I guess to me "the cloud" promises my computing ANYWHERE, but I see that as achievable without being all web based client computing.
My point is that the definition of "the cloud" is sufficiently vague that it's worth remembering that if we just say "the cloud" the other person might not understand what we mean by that specifically.
Yeah, that's true. I still think from what I've read, that the ultimate goal is everything on the web, but we may not get there for quite a while. At some point, it will seem normal. But we've got to take a few steps first.
As far as web browsing with iPhone OS version of Safari, I don't bother. The fact that it is incompatible with many, many websites makes it usable for only very limited web browsing. If there were other web browsers available for the iPhone OS I might use it to do more web browsing but Apple only allows their own web browser to be installed. As far as using different Apps for different websites, it is awkward to continually be opening and closing Apps simply to visit and use the content from different websites that a single, good web browser can do. So if I need to do any real web browsing / internet work, I open my MacBook.
This trend toward a closed model of computing that the iPhone / iPad represents is truly worrisome. If this is the future of computing, where the computer companies dictate to their customers what they can and can't install on their machines, I'd rather go back to pen and paper, public libraries, and real books.
Did they poll the exact same pool of people before AND after? If not then this really doesn't amount to much because you don't see the opinion shift within the same body.
In statistics it is called a sample. The question you should ask is how many people were asked before and after, not if they were the same.
Try using the "cloud" on shared 300 Kb/s down - 100 Kb/s up internet that is shared, and you'll see that for many people, the idea of cloud computing is next to impossible and local storage becomes paramount. Even watching videos on YouTube becomes a chore unless you have a decent Flash downloading and converting client so you can start the downloads and come back hours later to watch your videos.
As far as web browsing with iPhone OS version of Safari, I don't bother. The fact that it is incompatible with many, many websites makes it usable for only very limited web browsing. If there were other web browsers available for the iPhone OS I might use it to do more web browsing but Apple only allows their own web browser to be installed. As far as using different Apps for different websites, it is awkward to continually be opening and closing Apps simply to visit and use the content from different websites that a single, good web browser can do. So if I need to do any real web browsing / internet work, I open my MacBook.
This trend toward a closed model of computing that the iPhone / iPad represents is truly worrisome. If this is the future of computing, where the computer companies dictate to their customers what they can and can't install on their machines, I'd rather go back to pen and paper, public libraries, and real books.
Actually, browsing with Safari on the iPhone is great as long as you have a decent connection. The connection problem is the same with any browser on any mobile device, as they're all slow.
To everyone bitching about the ipad & iphone lack of flash support, MSFT is following Apple's lead and not supporting flash in windows mobile 7. Flash's days appear to be numbered..
It will be funny to watch Baller stumble through another keynote presentation tomorrow introducing mobile 7.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/06/r...wc-launch-zun/
To everyone bitching about the ipad & iphone lack of flash support, MSFT is following Apple's lead and not supporting flash in windows mobile 7. Flash's days appear to be numbered..
It will be funny to watch Baller stumble through another keynote presentation tomorrow introducing mobile 7.
Windows Mobile 6.5.x is getting Flash 10.1 this Summer-ish.So I have a feeling that Windows Mobile 7 will be based off the Zune HD OS which uses a the new Windows Embedded CE 6.0, not the OS in their current phones, which is why I think Flash cann't be supported for the time.
There is also the possible that Flash 10.1 Beta for WinMo was transferable to WinMo7 but it made IE too sluggish. That is the official reason from Mozilla as to why they disabled Flash in Firefox Mobile on Maemo.
I look forward to MS' announcement and demo. This is the most exciting thing to come out of MS in a long time. Perhaps 3 years too late, but it looks like they are finally getting a keen focus for WinMo.
PS: I like the Zune and if the iPod didn't exist I'd have bought a Zune and I fully understand that if not for the iPod existing the Zune couldn't have copied the iPod.
Windows Mobile 6.5.x is getting Flash 10.1 this Summer-ish.So I have a feeling that Windows Mobile 7 will be based off the Zune HD OS which uses a the new Windows Embedded CE 6.0, not the OS in their current phones, which is why I think Flash cann't be supported for the time.
There is also the possible that Flash 10.1 Beta for WinMo was transferable to WinMo7 but it made IE too sluggish. That is the official reason from Mozilla as to why they disabled Flash in Firefox Mobile on Maemo.
I look forward to MS' announcement and demo. This is the most exciting thing to come out of MS in a long time. Perhaps 3 years too late, but it looks like they are finally getting a keen focus for WinMo.
PS: I like the Zune and if the iPod didn't exist I'd have bought a Zune and I fully understand that if not for the iPod existing the Zune couldn't have copied the iPod.
Of course, MS will prefer to support Silverlight over Flash anyway.
I'm curious s to whether the rumors of WM 7 not supporting multitasking any more than the current iPhone OS, is true. If so, they are going backwards, and their publicity over WM supporting it over the iPhone as an advantage will no longer be true. Also the new app store. That's copying Apple as well, and also negates their badmouthing Apple's method.
But if Apple does get MT in 40. It will be a reversal. I wonder how MS would handle that?
As far as the Zune goes. I've seen less than a handful here in NYC since it first came out. It's been plenty of time for it to have succeeded. It's failed. Quite honestly, other than some tech writers, I don't know of more than one person who bought one, and he did it just to be different. He's a friend of my daughters, and doesn't have a Zune anymore.
As the Zune has been so unpopular, I can't think of a single good reason why MS would want to Zunify WM 7. Two failures together just leads to one bigger failure. I can only imagine that it will serve to make WM 7 LESS popular.
Of course, MS will prefer to support Silverlight over Flash anyway.
I'm curious s to whether the rumors of WM 7 not supporting multitasking any more than the current iPhone OS, is true. If so, they are going backwards, and their publicity over WM supporting it over the iPhone as an advantage will no longer be true. Also the new app store. That's copying Apple as well, and also negates their badmouthing Apple's method.
But if Apple does get MT in 40. It will be a reversal. I wonder how MS would handle that?
As far as the Zune goes. I've seen less than a handful here in NYC since it first came out. It's been plenty of time for it to have succeeded. It's failed. Quite honestly, other than some tech writers, I don't know of more than one person who bought one, and he did it just to be different. He's a friend of my daughters, and doesn't have a Zune anymore.
As the Zune has been so unpopular, I can't think of a single good reason why MS would want to Zunify WM 7. Two failures together just leads to one bigger failure. I can only imagine that it will serve to make WM 7 LESS popular.
Zune is a failure in marketing and sales, but the OS is sound. When The Zune OS 2.0 was designed I was saying back then, likely on these forums, that MS should use it for a touch-based version of WinMo. I think this is a good move for MS. They are following Apple, according to the rumours, but it's a focus that could lead to some very real sales in the future.
PS: Not mentioned, syncing will also be done via the Zune software, like the iPhone with iTunes.
Zune is a failure in marketing and sales, but the OS is sound. When The Zune OS 2.0 was designed I was saying back then, likely on these forums, that MS should use it for a touch-based version of WinMo. I think this is a good move for MS. They are following Apple, according to the rumours, but it's a focus that could lead to some very real sales in the future.
PS: Not mentioned, syncing will also be done via the Zune software, like the iPhone with iTunes.
Now that we have a much better idea of what the phone will be like, after the intro at Barcalona, I'm sort of wondering what they're thinking.
I'm seing comments that while they seem to have added some pretty good things, the interface is a mess. From what I see, I agree. I hope for their sake, it's incomplete, because it looks half assed.
The rumors about it being incompatible with all the older software seems to be a boneheaded idea. Even Palm has an emulator.
It doesn't really matter if it's better that old WM. People simply aren't interested in a Zune-like device.
And earlier, when you said that if it weren't for the iPod, you might have bought a Zune, well, I was thinking about that statement, and found it funny.
If there was no iPod, there wouldn't have been a Zune either. So you wouldn't have had that choice.
Now that we have a much better idea of what the phone will be like, after the intro at Barcalona, I'm sort of wondering what they're thinking.
I'm seing comments that while they seem to have added some pretty good things, the interface is a mess. From what I see, I agree. I hope for their sake, it's incomplete, because it looks half assed.
The rumors about it being incompatible with all the older software seems to be a boneheaded idea. Even Palm has an emulator.
It doesn't really matter if it's better that old WM. People simply aren't interested in a Zune-like device.
It seems boneheaded, but I do agree with them start small and focused, which seems to be what they are doing right now. I am pretty excited about WM7 as a real competitor and think the October timeframe is a great time for a release if we assume the next iPhone will be arriving in the Summer. I don't expect the sales to be anywhere near the iPhone or Android-based devices, but I think it can be a player. We still compare and contrast to WebOS and it's sales are lower than I'd expect from a WM7 phone.
And earlier, when you said that if it weren't for the iPod, you might have bought a Zune, well, I was thinking about that statement, and found it funny.
If there was no iPod, there wouldn't have been a Zune either. So you wouldn't have had that choice.
I've stated that before. I really do like much about the Zune, though usually when I make that statement I do note that the Zune wouldn't exist with the iPod. I guess I didn't on the post you read.
It seems boneheaded, but I do agree with them start small and focused, which seems to be what they are doing right now. I am pretty excited about WM7 as a real competitor and think the October timeframe is a great time for a release if we assume the next iPhone will be arriving in the Summer. I don't expect the sales to be anywhere near the iPhone or Android-based devices, but I think it can be a player. We still compare and contrast to WebOS and it's sales are lower than I'd expect from a WM7 phone.
The problem is that the market isn't was it was when the iPhone first appeared. It's now much more developed, with four new competitors that didn't exist early 2007. Apple, Android, Palm WebOS, and Nokia's Memeo, and soon to be appearing, Samsung's Bada.
Where will this fit it?
All of these platforms except Bada, have at least 1,000 apps, and most have tens of thousands, including Blackberry.
By the time W Phone 7 comes out, they will all have a lot more. This isn't good for MS as far as its competitiveness goes. How are they going to advertise that?
Remember what WM is aimed at now. Business. It's done well there because of its business apps, security, compatibility with MS's systems, etc. They're giving a lot of that up with this, to pursue the consumer market. To me, it's a mistake. They should have given up on that, and made it a much stronger competitor to RIM in the business market. Now, I'm certain that they'll lose much of those business customers.
All the people who have depended on certain business applications won't have them. Will those developers take a chance on the new platform? It's a good guess. With RIM coming up strong, and Apple coming up stronger, and with both of those companies with strong sales into the business market, there's a good chance those developers, or a large group of them, will leave MS and move to the others with proven sales. It's a circular spiral downward. Without the apps, loss of sales. Without the sales, loss of apps. We've seen it on the Mac platform during the late '90's through the early '00's.
And what about the loss of full multitasking? I suppose MS thought that if Apple could get away with it, they could as well. But it will be bad for their business markets where it's expected. It's also funny, because it's one area in which MS has blasted Apple about that they actually had an advantage, whatever the performance.
And really, what happens if Apple DOES introduce full multitasking with 4.0? How does marketing address that?
The whole thing is screwy.
I've stated that before. I really do like much about the Zune, though usually when I make that statement I do note that the Zune wouldn't exist with the iPod. I guess I didn't on the post you read.
I just looked back, and you did. I didn't remember it.
The problem is that the market isn't was it was when the iPhone first appeared. It's now much more developed, with four new competitors that didn't exist early 2007. Apple, Android, Palm WebOS, and Nokia's Memeo, and soon to be appearing, Samsung's Bada.
Where will this fit it?
All of these platforms except Bada, have at least 1,000 apps, and most have tens of thousands, including Blackberry.
By the time W Phone 7 comes out, they will all have a lot more. This isn't good for MS as far as its competitiveness goes. How are they going to advertise that?
Remember what WM is aimed at now. Business. It's done well there because of its business apps, security, compatibility with MS's systems, etc. They're giving a lot of that up with this, to pursue the consumer market. To me, it's a mistake. They should have given up on that, and made it a much stronger competitor to RIM in the business market. Now, I'm certain that they'll lose much of those business customers.
All the people who have depended on certain business applications won't have them. Will those developers take a chance on the new platform? It's a good guess. With RIM coming up strong, and Apple coming up stronger, and with both of those companies with strong sales into the business market, there's a good chance those developers, or a large group of them, will leave MS and move to the others with proven sales. It's a circular spiral downward. Without the apps, loss of sales. Without the sales, loss of apps. We've seen it on the Mac platform during the late '90's through the early '00's.
And what about the loss of full multitasking? I suppose MS thought that if Apple could get away with it, they could as well. But it will be bad for their business markets where it's expected. It's also funny, because it's one area in which MS has blasted Apple about that they actually had an advantage, whatever the performance.
And really, what happens if Apple DOES introduce full multitasking with 4.0? How does marketing address that?
The whole thing is screwy.
I agree with everything you've said but other option do they have if they want to stay in their market? The biggest problem (and I mean big) is the shear lateness to this party but putting that aside the rest seems pretty good.
The only thing I may have waited on, at this point, is when I revealed specifics of my OS and UI. We have rapid development of Android with the community quickly Borging any good ideas and the iPhone Os 4.0 demo likely a month away with plenty of development coming for the 3 months following, ready to take anything clever MS might offer, like strong social networking features. I'd have just teased with built up anticipation until about a month after the iPhone is released and no longer a surprise. I'd have an WM7 SDK ready at that time because then the interest would be high, but I'd definitely be released before the OS goes live, unlike what Palm did with WebOS on that front.
The primary problem is that MS should have done this years ago. They don't have much time to position WP7. They are already way behind in several ways.
MS needs to get as many developers as possible on board and ship with a full slate of apps. Otherwise it will be extremely difficult to build developer momentum.
MS really needs the Zune OS on their tablets. But with this being MS they will figure that out after Apple and Google dominate the tablet market.
Now that we have a much better idea of what the phone will be like, after the intro at Barcalona, I'm sort of wondering what they're thinking.
I'm seing comments that while they seem to have added some pretty good things, the interface is a mess. From what I see, I agree. I hope for their sake, it's incomplete, because it looks half assed.
The rumors about it being incompatible with all the older software seems to be a boneheaded idea. Even Palm has an emulator.
It doesn't really matter if it's better that old WM. People simply aren't interested in a Zune-like device.
I agree with everything you've said but other option do they have if they want to stay in their market? The biggest problem (and I mean big) is the shear lateness to this party but putting that aside the rest seems pretty good.
The problem for them is that their market isn't the consumer, it's business. And they're moving away from that, and pretty sharply. They're trying to move in a different direction than before, and I'm not so sure they have too much of a chance there. Really, what can they offer that isn't being offered? They may arrange things somewhat differently, but the services are no different that what's being offered elsewhere.
And, as you say, if Apple has a more social networked OS, then even that won't help them. No one else is standing still, and without apps or anything else to really stand out, they'll get lost. That's why I said they should have stuck to their hard core users; business people, and strengthened their offerings.
The only thing I may have waited on, at this point, is when I revealed specifics of my OS and UI. We have rapid development of Android with the community quickly Borging any good ideas and the iPhone Os 4.0 demo likely a month away with plenty of development coming for the 3 months following, ready to take anything clever MS might offer, like strong social networking features. I'd have just teased with built up anticipation until about a month after the iPhone is released and no longer a surprise. I'd have an WM7 SDK ready at that time because then the interest would be high, but I'd definitely be released before the OS goes live, unlike what Palm did with WebOS on that front.
Well, I believe that Palm thought that if they waited until after Apple, they would have gotten lost in the rush. But, from my perspective in business, and advertising, that was a blunder. They should have waited 6 months. That would have been right in the middle of the iPhone's life, when things are at a lull. Then they would have been able to get more publicity on a more sustained basis, and possibly could have finished the SDK. At this point in history, not having an SDK finished in time to have a decent number of new apps available the first day of the phone's release is almost suicide.
It does no good for people to say that Apple didn't have one for a full year. Times were different, and the iPhone was so compelling on its own, that it sold very well anyway. Once the SDK came out, there was a ready customer base to sell into. And of course, complementing the phone was the Touch, adding another 6 to 8 million customers for most of the apps. So there was about 20+ million people ready for apps, which took off right away, with a well thought out SDK and store.
Palm had neither.
What to make of the MS offering? When will the SDK be available? What about a simulator? I didn't see any info about that, but it had better be by the summer.
Also, what's with the store? I can't tell if it will be the only way to get apps, or just the way to get certified apps. If the former, then they've Appleified even more - again.
Whatever happens with it, there won't be many customers for the software for some time.
I'll reserve judgement until the actually have a shipping process. A lot can happen in 8 months. I think MS needed to make a clean break from WinMo, it was just too old,
The primary problem is that MS should have done this years ago. They don't have much time to position WP7. They are already way behind in several ways.
MS needs to get as many developers as possible on board and ship with a full slate of apps. Otherwise it will be extremely difficult to build developer momentum.
MS really needs the Zune OS on their tablets. But with this being MS they will figure that out after Apple and Google dominate the tablet market.
I think they're taking a big chance with what they've done. I don't know if they're aware of it, or they're so convinced they have a winner that it hasn't crossed their minds. They thought they had a winner with the Zune line, but were hedging their bets by not making predictions on how many they would sell. They don't release sales figures either. The numbers have to be figured out.
I'm curious as to how much under the hood work is almost ready. The word has been that they are falling behind, and it may not arrive until early 2011. We all know that MS is optimistic, but they revise release dates back. They've been doing that with this.
If they miss the holiday, they will miss a big chance. It's interesting that Apple releases the iPods for the holiday season, but the phone in the "dead" of summer. A phone isn't supposed to be a holiday gift, but it is.
The other question is about those developers. How many will actually produce apps, as opposed to mouthing their support, blah, blah, blah. A lot of developers are stretched thin these days. There were never so many competing application platforms as now. How many can they address? Without a single phone sold, will developers rush in, or wait it out until they see how the phone is doing? If the latter, that could kill it. What about all their business developmental partners? This is a totally new, unproven OS with unknown phones. Will they be looking askance at MS and towards Apple and RIM, if they aren't already doing so?
There are a lot of questions here.
HTML5 and web apps are the most practical way to deliver content to all of these different phones at once. Its easier to adjust the UI on a web app for each phone than write and support an entirely different native app.
MS appears to even be making this difficult for themselves as WP7 will ship with IE, which does not appear to have any intent to fully support HTML5.
The other question is about those developers. How many will actually produce apps, as opposed to mouthing their support, blah, blah, blah. A lot of developers are stretched thin these days. There were never so many competing application platforms as now. How many can they address? Without a single phone sold, will developers rush in, or wait it out until they see how the phone is doing? If the latter, that could kill it. What about all their business developmental partners? This is a totally new, unproven OS with unknown phones. Will they be looking askance at MS and towards Apple and RIM, if they aren't already doing so?
MS appears to even be making this difficult for themselves as WP7 will ship with IE, which does not appear to have any intent to fully support HTML5.
Mozilla has recently released Firefox Mobile for a single device. If they can't get a decent browser built for a mobile platform I have doubts MS can with IE in any decent timeframe.
Yes I'd raised this issue last year when the Palm Pre was supposed to destroy the iPhone. Developers are not going to be able to develop a native app for all of these different phones. The platform currently in place to be the great equalizer between all of these different phones is the web.
HTML5 and web apps are the most practical way to deliver content to all of these different phones at once. Its easier to adjust the UI on a web app for each phone than write and support an entirely different native app.
MS appears to even be making this difficult for themselves as WP7 will ship with IE, which does not appear to have any intent to fully support HTML5.
The one thing MS has is plenty of money, and the willingness to lose plenty of it in pursuit of its goals. We can look to the X Box and see how that works. They've lost an estimated 8 billion on the entertainment division since the X Box first appeared, but it didn't do anything to dissuade them to not give it up as every other company in the world would have. Same thing with their internet initiatives, billions lost there as well.
Palm has no billions to lose. If their sales don't perk up remarkably, or are bought out, they will go under.
So MS will likely keep plodding along if this doesn't turn successful. Eventually, they will gather developers and sales. That's what happens with monopoly software profits with a locked in market.
Mozilla has recently released Firefox Mobile for a single device. If they can't get a decent browser built for a mobile platform I have doubts MS can with IE in any decent timeframe.
Mozilla has recently released Firefox Mobile for a single device. If they can't get a decent browser built for a mobile platform I have doubts MS can with IE in any decent timeframe.
As I just said to Teno, MS has virtually unlimited funds to pour into any project they want to push. Despite their not having the best software with all that money, they do manage to outlast many of their competitors. If Mozilla had more than a small fraction of the sums MS can ladle into this, they could have done more. Apple also doesn't use the infinite funding model on a project the way MS does, or Safari would be much better than it is.