Is the 950 and 950XL running windows 10?

Ed Boland

Retired Ambassador
Nov 17, 2012
4,704
5
38
Visit site
AT&T is doing the same thing; advertising the Lumia 950 as running "Windows 10"

AT&T_Win10.JPG

While I understand the differences myself, as most of us here on the site do, I do get a kick out of showing people at work my 1520 and telling them that it's running "Windows 10". Of course I'm the only one at work with a Windows Phone; everyone else has iPhones or Android phones. If I somehow convinced someone to switch and get a Windows phone, I'd then be obligated to explain "oh, this is Windows 10 Mobile... it's a little different", but I hardly see that happening. I feel that maybe Microsoft is employing this same sort of "tactic" to intrigue or lure people to the platform, which currently may be a sort of "bait and switch" scenario, but perhaps in a not so distant future, when the x86 Intel phones become a reality, Windows 10 Mobile, and Windows 10 may become more one and the same.

In other words, a year or two from now, when we pull our phones out of our pockets, I don't think we'll be lying when we say "this is Windows 10".
 

a5cent

New member
Nov 3, 2011
6,622
0
0
Visit site
...but perhaps in a not so distant future, when the x86 Intel phones become a reality, Windows 10 Mobile, and Windows 10 may become more one and the same.

In other words, a year or two from now, when we pull our phones out of our pockets, I don't think we'll be lying when we say "this is Windows 10".

I can't say what MS is thinking (or even directly responsible for) in terms of their W10 vs W10M communication strategy, but I can comment on the above:

not happening

If (or more likely when) an x86 based WM phone is released, it will actually run W10, not W10M. So, you're right that we'll then be able to say, without lying, that such a device is running W10. However, that doesn't mean W10M will have served its purpose and just fade away.

Both W10 and W10M have their place and their role to play. Neither can fully replace the other without MS loosing many strategically important capabilities. W10M will stick around for as long as MS decides to compete with Android in the affordable smartphone and tablet market.

The day MS terminates W10M, and leaves us only with full W10, is likely the day MS exits the smartphone market altogether.
 

Krystianpants

New member
Sep 2, 2014
1,828
0
0
Visit site
I think people understand the limitations of a phone versus a full powerful desktop. MS's true vision of windows 10 is actually to phase out the w32 api. It's part of why they are pushing everyone to upgrade and are pushing their developer tools to convert w32 apps. When that day happens they don't want to re-brand their products, it will still just be windows 10. So really their marketing is not incorrect for their vision of what windows 10 is. We all know windows 10 isn't really complete yet. Their updates will slowly come and help people adjust to the full blown change rather than throwing the change at them all at once.

While the ads may be a bit misleading. They are no different from what any other marketing team may be doing. When a customer plugs in their phone into a pc the expectation is that they will only be running the apps that are on their phone. Their phone can't run w32 apps to begin with so why would they expect it to do so all of a sudden? Nobody will expect anything different. And so once more apps are converted to UWP they will be able to run all their apps from their phone on the big screen. So technically they are just running windows 10 the way windows 10 is meant to run. Currently windows 10 for desktop is a mix match of windows 10 and previous versions.

MS just has to be careful with how they phase out the w32 api and in what time frame. Right now the push is to get developers to jump on their own by giving incentives. And they really need to give api's that are very close to what w32 offers. My guess is that with centennial it seems it can support the vast majority of w32 apps.
 

realwarder

New member
Dec 31, 2012
3,689
0
0
Visit site
I can't say what MS is thinking (or even directly responsible for) in terms of their W10 vs W10M communication strategy, but I can comment on the above:

not happening

If (or more likely when) an x86 based WM phone is released, it will actually run W10, not W10M. So, you're right that we'll then be able to say, without lying, that such a device is running W10. However, that doesn't mean W10M will have served its purpose and just fade away.

Both W10 and W10M have their place and their role to play. Neither can fully replace the other without MS loosing many strategically important capabilities. W10M will stick around for as long as MS decides to compete with Android in the affordable smartphone and tablet market.

The day MS terminates W10M, and leaves us only with full W10, is likely the day MS exits the smartphone market altogether.

I think you're interpretation of what is Windows 10 may be different from Microsoft's. You are looking from a user perspective, saying that the desktop UI and having Win32 compatibility is required. Microsoft is looking at it from the kernel, drivers and focusing on UWP which is supported on IoT, phone, desktop, Xbox. For them, Win32 is a compatibility layer, more so when you start looking at the vision of Centennial which starts pulling old Win32 apps into a more managed UWP VM.

I don't deny that the average user thinks Windows is a PC with desktop that runs any Win32 legacy app, but I'm not sure that's what Microsoft sees for the future. And for that reason, the phone really is running Windows 10.
 

Giddora

New member
Jan 14, 2012
431
0
0
Visit site
Lumia 950 and all other W10 phones are running Windows 10 with the new runtime... The same runtime as you can find n PC's. The only difference is that on PC's you have the old win32 runtimes still laying around for now.

In short: W10 phones are running Windows 10. It has the same driverstack, kernel... Everything. The only thing it does not have is the old x86/amd64 (win32) runtime environment. Simple as that.
 

a5cent

New member
Nov 3, 2011
6,622
0
0
Visit site
^ Ehm…

Does W10M support multiple versions of the .NET framework?
> No. It doesn't even support one (this could be split up into dozens of individual .NET related technologies that W10M doesn't support).

Does W10M come with built in support for IIS ?
> No

Does W10M support Windows Management Instrumentation?
> No

Does W10M come with a configurable firewall?
> No

Does W10M support Hyper-V?
> No

Does W10M support Active Directory Lightweight Directory Service?
> No

Does W10M support any of the gazillion legacy DB access technologies, that are still often used in native code applications?
> No

For many of the more serious software titles, those things are necessities because they won't run without them! And that list goes on and on and on! There are a gazillion W10 features like this that W10M doesn't include.

You can also look at it this way:

The space required to install W10M and 1st party apps on my L830 (off the top of my head) is about 4 GB. My W10 installation, with almost all software and apps deleted/removed, is over three times that size. Where do you think that size difference comes from? Obviously, that huge difference in size can’t be attributed only to the handful of DLLs (shell32.dll, ole32.dll, etc) that implement the Win32 API!

Compared to W10, the idea that an implementation of Win32 is the only thing W10M omits is just flat out incorrect.

Don't get me wrong. There's nothing wrong with that. It's actually a good thing, because W10M couldn't achieve it's goals as a low-cost and (comparatively) light weight OS if it were otherwise.
 
Last edited:

seb_r

New member
Aug 1, 2014
182
0
0
Visit site
RT was killed by uninformed journalists who just kept repeating the fact that it was a "crippled" version of windows that couldn't run .exe applications.
RT was killed by nobody else than MSFT! No upgrade to Win10 and therefore no universal apps. Not the first time they drop support for hardware quickly.
 

a5cent

New member
Nov 3, 2011
6,622
0
0
Visit site
I think you're interpretation of what is Windows 10 may be different from Microsoft's. You are looking from a user perspective, saying that the desktop UI and having Win32 compatibility is required. Microsoft is looking at it from the kernel, drivers and focusing on UWP which is supported on IoT, phone, desktop, Xbox. For them, Win32 is a compatibility layer, more so when you start looking at the vision of Centennial which starts pulling old Win32 apps into a more managed UWP VM.

I don't deny that the average user thinks Windows is a PC with desktop that runs any Win32 legacy app, but I'm not sure that's what Microsoft sees for the future. And for that reason, the phone really is running Windows 10.

First off, let me be clear that I'm not looking at this from a user’s perspective at all. I'm looking at it from the perspective of computer science, and what people working in the field generally feel defines an OS. Most would say that two OSes can only be considered the same if they can run the same software. That's one of the most fundamental requirements, and W10M and W10 don't meet that requirement. Period. As far as I'm concerned, at least from a technical perspective and for the present time, that's the end of same-vs-not-same debate.

I understand you're getting around that definition by declaring millions of Windows software titles (the things Windows users care most about) as obsolete, and by relegating at least 2/3rds of W10 to "compatibility layer" status. In short, you're saying everything that is different is obsolete, so they are the same. I agree that this will someday make sense, but adopting that definition and related terminology today seems very premature to me. I understand that you're ignoring the current reality and looking more at the conceptual idea of where W10 is headed, but currently that mark on the timeline is still quite a ways off.

However, I agree that W10M is the real future of Windows. Some here envision everything eventually just becoming W10 (once an x86 based phone is released), but if anything is eventually phased out, that is far more likely to be W10, not W10M! More precisely, what will be phased out are the many GB's worth of legacy functionality W10 contains, which serve no purpose in a purely UWP based world. Whatever we're left with at that point, and whatever it will be called, it will be a lot closer to today's W10M than today's W10. In regard to this issue I think we're on the same page.

The thing is, we're still many years away from the point of transitioning away from W10. In regard to transitioning, I'd also add that I've never heard of Centennial placing Win32 software in a managed UWP VM. AFAIK Centennial is more accurately described as a combination of run-time file system virtualization and dev-time automated installer repackaging. It doesn't, in any way, allow Win32 software to run on the UWP, so I wouldn't count that as a meaningful step towards getting most Win32 software migrated over to the UWP. Centennial's goal is to make Win32 software distributable through the store. We're nowhere close to the point where we could easily convert Win32 software into universal apps.

In summary, all the things that could/would eventually make it reasonable to give both OSes the same moniker are all still very much in the future. I see no benefit to confusing people by introducing terminology that will be technically inaccurate for many years to come. Why not just introduce that terminology when it actually matches reality?

Anyway, reasoning aside, I understand your fundamental point. AFAIK you could be right about MS (you?) and myself judging what W10 is from different perspectives. Truth is I have no idea what MS thinks the name "W10" does or does not refer to. Based on the fact that MS initially called W10M just W10, then went with W10 for Phones, then settled on W10M, and that we're now seeing some people go back to just W10, I think it's clear that MS are themselves very much lacking a clear idea of what W10 is and what it isn't. They wouldn't have that problem if they'd just stick with a nomenclature that reflects reality as it is today, as I'm trying to do.
 
Last edited:

Ed Boland

Retired Ambassador
Nov 17, 2012
4,704
5
38
Visit site
I can't say what MS is thinking (or even directly responsible for) in terms of their W10 vs W10M communication strategy, but I can comment on the above:

not happening

If (or more likely when) an x86 based WM phone is released, it will actually run W10, not W10M. So, you're right that we'll then be able to say, without lying, that such a device is running W10. However, that doesn't mean W10M will have served its purpose and just fade away.

Both W10 and W10M have their place and their role to play. Neither can fully replace the other without MS loosing many strategically important capabilities. W10M will stick around for as long as MS decides to compete with Android in the affordable smartphone and tablet market.

The day MS terminates W10M, and leaves us only with full W10, is likely the day MS exits the smartphone market altogether.
You're right; Windows 10 Mobile will still exist.. for ARM based phones. But only for as long as the current ARM devices are supported, or until they're EOL'd.

I can't speak for Microsoft's strategy either, however, looking at their history, one can see a pattern. I think once they get the Intel x86 phones rolling, they'll be able to compete with the low end affordable market as well as the high end. They'll start to produce all sorts of x86 flavored smartphones; Flagship and budget.

Then, Windows 10 "Mobile" will be sentenced to death row where WP8.1 is already awaiting execution in a neighboring cell, where they'll follow in the ashes of WP7, Windows RT, etc.

These are just my personal thoughts and opinions of course, and do not reflect the actual plans or mobile strategies of Microsoft. Heck, what do I know...
 

a5cent

New member
Nov 3, 2011
6,622
0
0
Visit site
I You're right; Windows 10 Mobile will still exist.. for ARM based phones. But only for as long as the current ARM devices are supported, or until they're EOL'd.

<snipped>

I think once they get the Intel x86 phones rolling, they'll be able to compete with the low end affordable market as well as the high end. They'll start to produce all sorts of x86 flavored smartphones; Flagship and budget.

Then, Windows 10 "Mobile" will be sentenced to death row where WP8.1 is already awaiting execution in a neighboring cell, where they'll follow in the ashes of WP7, Windows RT, etc.
.

This is where you (and others) err. The primary fallacy appears to be the idea that MS could compete in the low-end/affordable mobile market with W10. Resource consumption and hardware requirements preclude it from doing so however. That's the entire raison d'etre of W10M. That's the job W10M was specifically designed to do. If W10 could achieve that, then the last five years of W10M would just have been an incredibly stupid and expensive detour, just to end up where MS already was (running Windows on ARM a.k.a RT has been possible for a very long time already).

Anyway, you seem to imagine W10M being far more strongly tied to a particular CPU architecture than it really is.

MS is now at (or extremely close to) the point where they could just press a button and wait an hour (more or less), and then have a version of W10M that runs on an x86 CPU. W10M is not about supporting ARM CPUs. It's only about running well on affordable hardware with limited resources. Whether that's an ARM or an x86 based configuration is pretty much irrelevant.
 
Last edited:

a5cent

New member
Nov 3, 2011
6,622
0
0
Visit site
Why hasn't thread been closed yet? Hasn't the OP's question been answered already?

As long as people like badMojo69 and others drink the marketing cool-aid rather than develop an understanding of the current technical reality, the question will never be answered.
 

colinkiama

New member
Oct 13, 2013
2,842
0
0
Visit site
As long as people like badMojo69 and others drink the marketing cool-aid rather than develop an understanding of the current technical reality, the question will never be answered.
Honestly I don't think anyone would be bothered to actually say Windows 10 Mobile. Just call it windows 10. You could say the 'Mobile' part is just an edition like 'pro', 'home', 'enterprise' etc

Wasn't the technical part something like having a similar kernel, UI, same code used to make apps etc. (correct me)
 

a5cent

New member
Nov 3, 2011
6,622
0
0
Visit site
Honestly I don't think anyone would be bothered to actually say Windows 10 Mobile. Just call it windows 10. You could say the 'Mobile' part is just an edition like 'pro', 'home', 'enterprise' etc

Wasn't the technical part something like having a similar kernel, UI, same code used to make apps etc. (correct me)

All the differences between W10 and W10M I've so far mentioned are technical. If you didn't understand them, then going into more detail is unlikely to help you understanding why the edition-analogy is utterly flawed (all W10 editions share the same APIs and run all the same software, while W10M does not). Maybe this is a better way of stating it:

Imagine we'd delete the 'W10 Mobile' and 'W10 Mobile Insider Preview' forums, and dump their contents into the corresponding 'W10' and 'W10 Insider Preview' forums! Also imagine we'd remove all 'M' or 'Mobile' designations from all posts including thread titles. If these two OSes are truly the same, then that would be the logical thing to do. Would that make posts clearer? Would that make information easier to find? Would that make the forums better?

If you don't think that's a good idea, and you'd prefer those forums to remain separate, then ask yourself why. When you know, you'll have your own personal explanation as to why you think these two OSes are different and should be treated as such, terminology included.

You can then also ask yourself why we don't need separate forums for home, pro and enterprise editions of W10, and you'll have discovered the flaw in that edition-analogy as well.
 

colinkiama

New member
Oct 13, 2013
2,842
0
0
Visit site
All the differences between W10 and W10M I've so far mentioned are technical. If you didn't understand them, then going into more detail is unlikely to help you understanding why the edition-analogy is utterly flawed (all W10 editions share the same APIs and run all the same software, while W10M does not). Maybe this is a better way of stating it:

Imagine we'd delete the 'W10 Mobile' and 'W10 Mobile Insider Preview' forums, and dump their contents into the corresponding 'W10' and 'W10 Insider Preview' forums! Also imagine we'd remove all 'M' or 'Mobile' designations from all posts including thread titles. If these two OSes are truly the same, then that would be the logical thing to do. Would that make posts clearer? Would that make information easier to find? Would that make the forums better?

If you don't think that's a good idea, and you'd prefer those forums to remain separate, then ask yourself why. When you know, you'll have your own personal explanation as to why you think these two OSes are different and should be treated as such, terminology included.

You can then also ask yourself why we don't need separate forums for home, pro and enterprise editions of W10, and you'll have discovered the flaw in that edition-analogy as well.


Now that you mentioned it, I understand why this thread is still here. Regular customers will see 'Windows 10' and assume the PC version. Even saying 'the mobile version of windows 10' would make more sense. It really is just to market the OS. To make it seem like it's the same everywhere with the UWP but the actual experience is different. Is it true that they marketed windows 8 RT like this too?
 

a5cent

New member
Nov 3, 2011
6,622
0
0
Visit site
Now that you mentioned it, I understand why this thread is still here. Regular customers will see 'Windows 10' and assume the PC version. Even saying 'the mobile version of windows 10' would make more sense. It really is just to market the OS. To make it seem like it's the same everywhere with the UWP but the actual experience is different. Is it true that they marketed windows 8 RT like this too?

To be clear, we so far only have a few tech sites referring to W10M as just 'W10'. We don't actually know if there is a concerted effort behind that, or if MS has anything to do with it at all. That's just speculation.

It just looks like W10 and W10M are being marketed as being the same, while in reality that is only partially true. Windows RT was never marketed as being the same. However, RT was also never explicitly marketed as being completely different either (i.e. incompatible with all Windows software).
 

pallentx

New member
Apr 13, 2012
166
0
0
Visit site
Windows 10 for desktop is a superset of Windows 10 for mobile. Everything W10M runs also runs on the desktop (with a few exceptions), but the desktop adds legacy stuff and other more advanced features that make sense for a desktop. You can think of W10 for mobile as the core of the OS that all the other versions share - everything required to support the universal app framework. Hololens will have extras unique to that hardware. The desktop will have extras unique to desktop computing. The Xbox will have its own. Even W10M has a few "uniques" - like a subsystem for making voice calls and texts and connecting to cellular networks.
 

pallentx

New member
Apr 13, 2012
166
0
0
Visit site
Now that you mentioned it, I understand why this thread is still here. Regular customers will see 'Windows 10' and assume the PC version. Even saying 'the mobile version of windows 10' would make more sense. It really is just to market the OS. To make it seem like it's the same everywhere with the UWP but the actual experience is different. Is it true that they marketed windows 8 RT like this too?
I don't think actual customers were confused about RT and they wont be confused about Windows 10. The only place I saw any real confusion on RT was on tech blogs by writers and commenters. In the real world, people I talked to understood the difference and just weren't interested in RT because there weren't many apps for it.

As for 10, right now we have the same problem, but Windows 10 was the end goal to address this problem. Now that there is a common app framework that runs on all "Windows", developers can reach more users with one set of code. I don't know if this strategy will work - time will tell, but its not the same thing we saw with 8 and RT.

Its difficult to market that your OSes have a common app framework, Its easier for people to get that its all windows 10 and everything runs apps for windows 10. I don't think anyone is going to buy a Windows Phone and be disappointed that it doesn't have IIS.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
322,917
Messages
2,242,891
Members
428,005
Latest member
rogertewarte