Why do people think that Windows 10 on ARM can save Surface Phone?

[aj173]

I already have full Windows 10 on my Lumia 1520. It's called RDPing through my desktop. It's nice to have full W10 on my phone in a few very specific circumstances, but overall, I fail to see how this will add anything to the mobile experience. It's nothing that great. I also fail to see how leveraging the desktop user base will do anything to bring missing phone-centric apps to Windows.

I hate to go full Thurott on everybody, but I'm just wondering what people are seeing that I'm not. As somebody who's used full W10 on a phone, it just doesn't seem like a savior to me.

 

[real0395]

Full feature support would be the main benefit. The core kernel/OS would receive frequent updates.

Where those features/updates benefit a CShell enabled UI/feature/function then the benefit would be felt on mobile at the same time as the Desktop/Tablet/Xbox/IoT equivalent.

There seems to be a complete misunderstanding of the convergence of OneCore and the purpose of 'Windows on Arm' and Adaptable CShell.

Cshell is what you see - the UI/UX User Interface/Experience. Cshell is an interpretive layer that sits on top of the core/kernel exactly the same as the existing Shell, but the fuss is all about how this new adaptable shell is context-aware and will shift to fit the display/interface at any given moment.

As a 'traditional' mobile it would look and function exactly as Windows 10 Mobile currently does - plug in a screen and *magic* it's Windows 10 Desktop (assuming WoA and Cshell ever arrive in full).

Windows on ARM is pivotal in the above being possible on a mobile device (without a x86/x64 processor).

Windows on ARM introduces multiple emulation, kernel and driver-level interfaces, or in laymans terms allows these various parts of the windows system, it's hardware and software to communicate. Intel and AMD based x86/x64 processors communicate in a completely different language to the ARM-based processors common in tablets, IoT devices and smartphones.


Neither Windows on ARM or CShell are a magic bullet on their own - the combination of these development (if ever released to phone) would ensure the future development of the platform and extend its' feature-set.


The sad, insulting, truth to all this is that Microsoft have tested WoA - it works (*on existing sod*ing 820 chipsets, cough 950, cough Elite X3*), they have already accidentally released a mobile build that includes CShell, but they refuse to say diddly-squat about mobile, give any indication of commitment and leave us all to wish, pray, attack each other and the Windows Mobile Insider and Mobile communities implode.

Regarding your last paragraph, I think the issue is that they technically could get it to work completely on an 820 chipset but the experience may suck and it probably isn't economically worth doing that with a small user base. Though, I do agree with you about their communication to consumers.

 

[cr_buck]

There is one main benefit. Reduction in hardware expenditures, license expenditures, and device support costs for business. Having a server for RDP is expensive and requires expensive licensing and still requires a phone to accomplish if you are going to use a phone. Cloud services are cheaper than on prem RDP and since most staff do tasks that modern mobile processors can do you can get rid of the desktop/laptop as well. That means no paying for a server, server software licensing, extra bandwidth, extra IT staff, laptop/desktop and phone, laptop/desktop software licensing and support. If done properly such a device could mean even enterprise could avoid buying everything but the cloud service. The phones could be cloud managed via Azure AD and Office 365 with limited hardware on prem. Most staff also wouldn't need a desktop or laptop since the same phone could do even basic desktop tasks like office if they wanted it. Since the number of devices support is reduced you can also reduce support staff costs. With limited need for device provisioning staff could be up and running too almost completely hands off by IT. This could apply to SMBs and Enterprise. Of course the larger number of devices would mean enterprise would reap the largest savings.

In short, if done right, a huge decrease in the hidden costs of technology.

 

[xsonwong]

Um...we just want to see the commitment from MS again...

 

[cBickmeier]

I see two benefits that could be a real game changer.

The first is a more efficient development pipline (as described by AbstractKiller), that would lead to shorter development cycles across the whole Windows universe.

The second point is, that da Surface "Phone" will not be a "phone" that could be compared to an iPhone or Galaxy. It will be a mobile PC that can handle phone calls and creates a whole new category of devices that could realy attract consumers and could shake up everything.

You ask yourself: why?

1. Imagine a Surface "phone" (or lets call it "Surface Mobile") that has a formfactor like the X3 but can transform itself to a tablet and can dock to external devices (Display, Keyboard, mouse, Webcam etc. and perhaps external GPU) and transform to a "real" PC. In this scenrio consumers could ask themself if it makes sense to purchase a phone, a tablet, a Notebook and a PC when they could just purchase a Surface Mobile (and the benefits of having a "tablet everywhere" and no Need for syncing different devices.

Imagine the following scenarios:

1. You have a workdeskt in your office and your home Office where you can dock your SM and continue working without syncing etc.

2. You have a notebook-dock (like that for the X3) when you need a "real" PC on the go

3. You can dock your SM to your TV and it brings up the Xbox-UI that can be controlled with a xbox-controller that is connected to the dock (for Netflix, Webbrowsing, Music, showing your Pictures and lightwight gaming)

4. You can wreless doch you SM to a hotel TV and work while on the go

5. You can wireless project a "real" Desktop to every Windows Computer and use your PC on the go (for example with the PC from a collegue)

6. You can project a "real" desktop with the integrated (or attached) table top projector on the table and use your "real PC" everywhere

7. I dont know, but I think there are many more scenarios

So... yes... I'm still optimistic and I think if MS get the SM right, there will be a chance to create a while new device category that attracts businesses AND consumers

 

[macgyverated]

Maybe this is an example of looking at the same scenery from two very different angles...

I use Windows Phone because I like it compared to other platforms. It's fast, fluid, unique, and more interactive than other platforms. As an It pro, I like how it integrates and syncs with my Windows ecosystems at work and at home. I also like that I'm not in the walled garden of iPhone, or the Wild West virus-laden free-for-all of Android, constantly dodging bullets while also divulging the essence of who I am to Google and its partners.

The reason most of us choose a phone platform has little to do with the"'phone" part of it, and is more about apps and features, along with hardware specs. Making a phone call or sending and receiving text messages is a trivial affair, and one that all platforms perform well. But we buy into phone mostly for the "computer" part of what it does, and less for the raw telephony features, which are largely standardized.

I want Windows on ARM primarily because I want to retain the features and capabilities I have grown to love about Windows Phone and Windows 10. That those devices will also be able to send and receive calls and texts is almost secondary. Yes, I need those features, but they can easily be integrated into any platform with the right radios. I just happen to want my telephony capabilities on a device that runs full Windows, and with CShell, one that will "act" like Windows Phone when that is all I need. Seriously, I see Windows 10 on ARM with telephony as a killer device. Add in how well it works within the greater Windows ecosystem (particularly in the business world) and it makes FAR too much sense not to have a device like that. I'd buy one in a heartbeat.

Just knowing that I could outfit our field staff with a single device that handles voice and text communication, email, GPS and other location-aware services, x86/x64 applications (like the full Office Suite), and is also app capable... I mean, what else could I ask for?! It would save me tens of thousands on hardware and licenses, as well as halving how many devices I have to update, maintain, and repair. It is a functional nexus that many in my field have daydreamed about, and we are closer than ever to having it in the real world.

 

[Christopher Kendalls]

Two things.

First, Thurrot knows what he's talking about. Yes, he is a naysayer and a dream killer, but he is a realist. Much better than listening to these apologists.

Second, its not like we're getting a cursor with our Win32 apps, with the screen as a trackpad. Anything we'll run will most likely be sandboxed, emulated, scaled, etc. Even if the phone is capable of doing that it simply is not the most practical way of moving forward. It won't be the same UI we get on the desktop. Maybe in the case of UWP apps, but that's about it.

The best that we can expect from this is that developers create for Windows 10 desktop, or even Windows 10 S, UWP, whatever, and that the phone is capable of running the same apps without any additional work from the developer. Then you can run SoundCloud, and all of those network TV apps and whatever else the way in which it was intended. And we'll have apps, because who doesn't want to develop for desktop Windows 10. People act like developers are going to cut their nose to spite their face because they hate Windows 10 Mobile just that much.

I don't know what Surface Phone is going to run or what it all entails. But an ARM phone, a real processor worth paying for in a phone with real possibilities, can definitely help out mobile devices running Windows 10 going forward.

And stuff like Continuum, Windows Hello? Every phone running ARM should be able to handle those things. I assume the phones will have 4 GB RAM or more, and more than a trivial amount of storage. Like 256 GB or more. Really can't see the downside to this.

 

[sweatshopking]

DOA.
windows has lost entirely to android. MS blew it over and over.

 

[Chris Stevens1]

MS has given up on the competing with the current state of smart phones and is focusing on the next "thing", an Ultimate Mobile Device (UMD).

Full windows 10 and Cshell allow MS and developers to concentrate on one platform not two. I'm pretty sure that MS's first UMD will be referred to by fans as a Surface Phone, but not by MS.

MS will say this is some thing else, not a phone. If it is successful in the business market, MS will be happy to let it spill over to consumers, but a consumer focus will not happen first thing.

 

[cBickmeier]

One Thing I have forgotten:

Think about this: Thanks to Windows on ARM, the next HoloLens iterations will be "a phone" too... lets imagine a HoloLens that is so smal that you can wear it like normal glasses (in 5-1ß years from now)... there you have it: the Smartphone is dead and MS back in the game (because MS-glasses are the only which can replace your Smartphone AND every other computing device) ;-)

 

[MikeB0514]

It's more about getting these Win32 desktop apps running on smaller devices (not just 6" phones, but even small 8-10" 'cellular' PCs) en mass, and thus enticing the developers to optimize their UI's for these smaller devices (UWA) - which has proven to be a huge challenge for Microsoft. Without widespread support away from Win32 and towards something more adaptable to *all* form factors (whether UWP or something else), MS will not be prepared for "the next big thing"

 

[mech1164]

The whole PC on a phone is going about it the wrong way. It's more about you'll have everything with you regardless. If I could just have a small handheld as the core. Then plugging in to do more complicated work is a no brainier.

Cshell is what makes this all work. On the go it looks and acts like WP10 no muss no fuss. Slide over and it's a small laptop screen. Plug it in and you have your whole desktop with KVM support.

What will sell this though is something that just came out Win10 S. This is Microsoft's goal of moving programs to the store. If they can do that then all of it falls into place.

That though is something that's not clear yet.

 

[ACF1]

I don't know if this has been addressed because I only read a handful of replies, but to me WoA strategy is very simple.

For desktop, it is hard to justify Windows S, because while security and performance endurance through the life of the device is important, a lot of desktop users were quite happy with Windows 7. In fact, there r a lot of people who haven't upgraded yet.

So WoA strategy comes in two places. Very cheap laptops using Windows S and Arm CPU, and tablets. Then you flood the market with these devices trying to compete with Android tablets, ipads and chromebooks. Just like Windows RT was supposed to do without the "I can't run my win32 app". Yes, the developer would have to update their application using project centennial, but it is a big step closer, and a possibility that wasn't there in WinRT. This strategy have the odds to be successful in the long term. In 20 years, most apps we use on windows will be UWP apps, so it seems a No brainer.

If this strategy starts sitting in with the market earlier, then you are bringing a UWP app ecosystem to all devices, which is what Win10 mobile lacks. So it is not about bringing full desktop to the phone. it is about mobile devices getting the windfall of that strategy and hopefully that turns into a successful phone venture.

Now, you say, so isn't Win10 mobile capable of running desktop UWP apps already and still we are not seeing UWP mobile apps coming to the store? Yes, but my earlier point is that there is little incentive to get UWP apps on the desktop to begin with, as most of us use a browser or Win32 apps on desktop. WoA will be incentive enough for developer to want to develop UWP as opposed to Win 32 because of the lower end devices and tablets. Also, UWP app APIs are getting better as UWP matures, hopefully one day matching/surpassing all the Win32 api lineup.

 

[Wevenhuis]

I already have full Windows 10 on my Lumia 1520. It's called RDPing through my desktop. It's nice to have full W10 on my phone in a few very specific circumstances, but overall, I fail to see how this will add anything to the mobile experience. It's nothing that great. I also fail to see how leveraging the desktop user base will do anything to bring missing phone-centric apps to Windows.

I hate to go full Thurott on everybody, but I'm just wondering what people are seeing that I'm not. As somebody who's used full W10 on a phone, it just doesn't seem like a savior to me.

For personal use I liked progress of Microsoft's continuum a lot, combined with uwp pps. Back in the windows mobile fays I was missing such a convenient feature for using a text editor to write documents and a diary. For entertainment a an easy projection of a photo alideshow or watching a movie was a nice extra. And continuum supports that on windows 10 mobile. The only thing two things missing for me is to be able to open and use 2 apps side by side for multitasking, drag and drop and a bit of productivity.

The latter and lack of uwo support is what I'm missing with windows 10 mobile for business. All else the windows 10 mobile with continuum design would have been great for a mobile PC in a small smartphone package would have been fine. For my work for several clients they are using a few win32 programs that are essential. If they could be package as uwo with no effort and eun over a secure connection on mobile I wouldn't need a laptop.
I don't need to use windows on a virtual environment. Nor do I want to. My experience is that the UI input is slow and buggy when in a mobile environment.
I think microoaft was on the right track with continuum. I'm not seeing the value with windows 10 on ARM. But I also think this is because microsoft is not clear on what they want to do with this. They call it "mobile" but it isn't clear if windows 10 on ARM is going to be a pc formfactor, which would remind me of a clover trail or atom type pc/tablet range.
A smartphone would likely be a surface phone type device, yet rumours seem to point to a tablet device. I don't see myself using this as a phone. I don't see the value in that. I will want a phone with that. I think the windows 10 mobile is the better approach, otherwise I would still need to use two devices, likely even three. But I don't need three windows 10 devices. I really only need one for personal, business and phone.
I am hoping microsoft wil still continue developing windows 10 mobile for current devices. The feature improvements are minor.

 

[L0n3N1nja]

Windows 10 running on ARM will do nothing for phones, will be great for tablets. Intel Atom has had no improvement in years and the new ARM chips are faster and more energy efficient. Expect more great and compact 2 in 1 designs that are actually an improvement over what's been on the market 3 years.

 

[roystreet]

What MS is trying to accomplish is very powerful & looks awesome. It would be amazing if they pull it off (and release it)...I know they can. It's exciting to see a device that doesn't need any type of RDP, VNC, etc. What I mean is, I don't want to have to have another device (My PC or some cloud service) to make it work like a full blown PC (or similar to that). It's nice to have RDP capability, but to me it's not worth it - Android & iOS already can do that to some degree. I remember seeing an app for iOS that allowed you to connect to your PC & run full blown Windows. Of course none of it was really optimized for touch based or mobile functionality. I don't think it ever really took off either. (That was before Windows 10)

Unfortunately, besides dabbling with it some initially, I would have no use for this. I personally don't think most people are looking for this type of one size fits all device. This concept seems like it may have more potential for businesses & not the average user. We commonly see this happening all the time in the existing world where a user uses 2 devices & are quite happy with that. Maybe the current competitors out there don't have an existing OS that appears to have the same flexibility, but that hasn't really hindered their market share any.

What I think would be wisest for enterprise (Some businesses already do this) is make business apps that work for the two main mobile OS's out there. Why? Because the user gets to keep their current (iOS or Android) device they use for personal use & that have a large ecosystem. Even if they have a work device that they have to leave at work, if it's using the same iOS or Android OS they aren't having to learn a new mobile OS than the one they use at home already.

Windows mobile (Or whatever you want to call it today) is great looking, but do people want to have to learn another mobile OS for their job?

Microsoft can innovate all they want, but two things hold them back from ever really being successful in the market. One, developers, in the Windows mobile world, when you look for apps.... The second reason, they don't keep supporting their own devices or OS's. We invest into the ecosystem, get excited about the next thing coming out, but get concerned that now my device won't be supported any more.

I'm afraid Microsoft is innovating & simply giving their competitors the ideas they need for their next update. The iPad is now getting more capabilities to essentially be a device that can seriously compete with Windows hybrids & win or keep customers. Google is giving users the ability for the Chromebook to run the vast amount of Android apps. I think both of these changes were heavily influenced by Microsoft's success in essentially creating the new hybrid market we have today.

I'm sure others can come up with other reasons why MS is holding themselves back.

 

[Jason Rosenthal]

Most people won't care if their computer is RISC or CISC. If it's a windows box, it needs to run all windows software well.

 

[Cosmin Petrenciuc]

Still we have the missing app in mobile mode problem. If, in order to be able to properly use an app I need to dock my mobile device, I don't see too many people embracing this new device. Many people already have a laptop or a desktop computer at home. I don't think they are going to ditch them on favor of a new device.
And, as another member had already pointed out, the docks aren't widely spread.

 

[sinime]

Apps. If you can run say bluestacks and install any Android app then the os has a good chance. If you can't install Android or ios apps then phones running Windows are McDoomed simple as that.

I have a sneaking suspicion that bluestacks wouldn't run well on a mobile device with an arm processor.

They just need to get a 10% market share and devs will port to it... Although that may be a target MS can't hit.

 

[anon(50597)]

One Thing I have forgotten:

Think about this: Thanks to Windows on ARM, the next HoloLens iterations will be "a phone" too... lets imagine a HoloLens that is so smal that you can wear it like normal glasses (in 5-1ß years from now)... there you have it: the Smartphone is dead and MS back in the game (because MS-glasses are the only which can replace your Smartphone AND every other computing device) ;-)

Except Apple may beat them to it, again.

 

[Vinicius Castro]

I gave up, bought a Oneplus and I'm very satisfied. Microsoft's going to have to do some miracle to have me as a client again, it's a lot of work to be swapping system.