C'mon guys! Some of the debates are pretty petty.
In the U.S., WP needs more phones on Verizon and Sprint, more exposure, and it needs to differentiate itself from iOS and Android devices. People I've talked to have a hard time understanding why Windows Phone exists when we have iPhones and so many Android phones.
I can't really speak for the rest of the world, though.
I agree that VZN and Sorint need more WP devices to increase market penetrationm. But VZN seems to letharcic or indifferent to MS windows Phones and Sprint is about the same, o less. TMo is in straits because D T wants out on NA markets. They have been courted by the others proimarily for their bandwidth and spectrum. ATT at least was using the same basic tecnology GPRS with the addition of AWS.
I cannot see verizon turning down a high end phone like the ace like one person suggested. Verizon is a business and all about making money and are not going to turn down a high end phone. I think once lte makes its way into wp7 you will see more on verizon.
it's already been confirmed that there will be a few LTe WP phones. Vz is known for saying things and then doing another so there's no doubt that there will be some high end phones on Vz and sprint if they don't go bankrupt.
I know it's been confirmed but that is what I am saying, currently there are none out and who knows that maybe one of those or both will make their way to verizon, especially with how samsung likes to make 1 model and have it on all of the carriers, like their galaxy line.
It will be on Verizon specifically because of how they have always said one thing and did another.
I think John Gruber's take is the best - no one really is quite sure why Windows Phone hasn't taken off, and it's obviously not just one or two points that can be easily solved. His analogy was if you showed a group of people Android, Windows Phone and iOS in their current iterations in 2006 (pre-iPhone), there would be more than 1% picking the Windows Phone.
So why hasn't it taken off? I can tell you mkr10001, it is not because it doesn't have bluetooth file transfer. KingCrimson, it is off-putting for haters such as yourself who are entrenched in photo-realism on a 2D screen.
Stop projecting your own objections into reasons why it hasn't taken off. If Microsoft had iterated on Windows Mobile (ie less aggressive look), it would have literally NOTHING against Android.
98% of the market prefers photo-realistic 3D icons vs flat boring live tiles. The market has spoken.
So I should sell my trophy and get an iPhone because a year from now WP market share will be the same as now?
Sent from my Windows 7 Phone using Board Express
I'm just saying it might be a waste of money to invest in a burning platform. Apple is selling 30 million iPhone per quarter compared to 100K window Phones.
Don't Windows PCs still outsell and have a large portion of the market? You should go to Mac forums and tell them they're wasting their money and tell Apple to stop making Macs.I'm just saying it might be a waste of money to invest in a burning platform. Apple is selling 30 million iPhone per quarter compared to 100K window Phones.
I'm just saying it might be a waste of money to invest in a burning platform. Apple is selling 30 million iPhone per quarter compared to 100K window Phones.
I think John Gruber's take is the best - no one really is quite sure why Windows Phone hasn't taken off, and it's obviously not just one or two points that can be easily solved. His analogy was if you showed a group of people Android, Windows Phone and iOS in their current iterations in 2006 (pre-iPhone), there would be more than 1% picking the Windows Phone.
So why hasn't it taken off? I can tell you mkr10001, it is not because it doesn't have bluetooth file transfer. KingCrimson, it is off-putting for haters such as yourself who are entrenched in photo-realism on a 2D screen.
Stop projecting your own objections into reasons why it hasn't taken off. If Microsoft had iterated on Windows Mobile (ie less aggressive look), it would have literally NOTHING against Android.
I think John Gruber's take is the best - no one really is quite sure why Windows Phone hasn't taken off, and it's obviously not just one or two points that can be easily solved. His analogy was if you showed a group of people Android, Windows Phone and iOS in their current iterations in 2006 (pre-iPhone), there would be more than 1% picking the Windows Phone.
So why hasn't it taken off? I can tell you mkr10001, it is not because it doesn't have bluetooth file transfer. KingCrimson, it is off-putting for haters such as yourself who are entrenched in photo-realism on a 2D screen.
Stop projecting your own objections into reasons why it hasn't taken off. If Microsoft had iterated on Windows Mobile (ie less aggressive look), it would have literally NOTHING against Android.
98% of the market prefers photo-realistic 3D icons vs flat boring live tiles. The market has spoken.
Verizon does it, T-mobile does it, AT&T does it, and Sprint does it. Seems like standard practice to me.