What I think Microsoft needs to do in order to gain market shares in the handset market.

Status
Not open for further replies.

N_LaRUE

New member
Apr 3, 2013
28,641
0
0
Visit site
I strongly recommend a little creative writing every day. It's a lot of fun, although regrettably all too often frowned upon in the workplace.

Creative... ok.... I used to write bad poetry when I was younger but I tend to just work these days and enjoy life.

I'm still not clear what why some people seem to think that I don't know what I'm talking about. I assume you refer to my claim that my PC takes ten minutes to start? That is, unfortunately, true. I have never claimed this was a typical experience, or that it was Microsoft's fault. In fact, I'm fairly confident that it's largely the fault of my company's IT department. However, it is not an uncommon experience, at least for those I talk to in the corporate world. But clearly it was not a good example, as it made people focus on PC start up times (which is not a particularly interesting subject) and not on whether Windows Phone could be more successful if it had a different name.
I still wonder whether, for example, 'Xbox phones' would sell better. Sadly, no one has yet offered their view on this.

I was referring to the idea of Windows, not your startup time. The idea is simple. Windows Phone, Windows RT and Windows OS will be unified. So calling them different names makes no sense. That's my point of you not understanding. Also you don't own a WP, not that you can't have an opinion, but you don't seem to get it.

Well, you can beat even my long experience with Windows. I first used it with Windows 3.1 and have used it probably every day of my professional life since Windows NT 4. I've written drivers for Windows, received special builds of the OS from Microsoft to help support forthcoming features, and used it to write probably 10s of thousands of lines of code (perhaps more). I still have the developer tools installed on my work laptop, although sadly I rarely get to use them these days.
So, I don't claim to be an expert, but I do have some experience of Windows. And I'm pretty aware of the pros and cons of the various platforms in use today. Perhaps I have weakness for provocative questions ... But also think they can be the most interesting. :)

I personally love technology. All of it. I love technology advancements and science. I favour Windows but I'm not going to bash any of the others because I believe to each their own.

Provocative questions are one thing. I'm not sure yours came off that way.
 

anony_mouse

Banned
Aug 10, 2013
1,042
0
0
Visit site
I was referring to the idea of Windows, not your startup time. The idea is simple. Windows Phone, Windows RT and Windows OS will be unified. So calling them different names makes no sense. That's my point of you not understanding. Also you don't own a WP, not that you can't have an opinion, but you don't seem to get it.

That's a good point! I haven't seen anyone say that before on this thread! Well, except for post 61 directly above yours, so thanks to martinmc78 as well. :) This is exactly the kind of discussion I was hoping to have.

Now, if I may rebut, for the purposes of examining the idea. While acknowledging your opinion, I would like to respectfully suggest that although a unified system of PCs, tablets and phones is a very fine aim (and I can obviously see why Microsoft would want to go this way), it is more important (from Microsoft's perspective) to actually sell a decent number of each type of device. They are, after all, a corporation with shareholders, and they exist to make money for those shareholders. (*) Now, PCs are pretty well covered - no need for concern about Windows running on them. So far, tablets and phones have not been so successful. It seems to me that it's more urgent for Microsoft to get large numbers of tablets and phones into the market, than to preserve the purity of the brand. Otherwise the unified platform will not get off the ground, and perhaps others will build something more successful first.
This leads us to the question of whether rebranding Windows Phone to, for example, Xbox phone (other suggestions are welcome) would help to increase sales. It seems I am in the minority here in thinking that it would, unless someone else would like to speak up?

(*) The question of whether the primary purpose of a corporation is to make money for shareholders is an interesting one, but let's save that for another day.

I personally love technology. All of it. I love technology advancements and science. I favour Windows but I'm not going to bash any of the others because I believe to each their own.

Favouring a technology for objective reasons, or even subjective reasons (such as finding the UI aesthetically appealing) is fine, and I'm sure that's the case for you. On the other hand, I always find it hard to understand the "******" mentality, which seems to me to be like supporting a football team - i.e. not a rational thing, but a purely emotional one. Actually, in some ways it's even worse. In the right context, football fans will usually readily admit, and even complain about at great length, the failings of their team. Technology fanboys will never admit the failings of their chosen system.
(This comment is a digression, and not aimed at anyone here. I'm sure you all recognise what I'm saying.)

Provocative questions are one thing. I'm not sure yours came off that way.

Well, I can only apologise if that was the case. If it was, you can rest assured that I was taught a fine lesson by being ridiculed for my choice of desktop operating system, disbelieved in reporting of my PC start up time, and accused (no doubt with excellent justification) of being clickbait (%) and a technology journalist's wet dream (although that comment said more about the writer than the reader).

(%): still not sure what 'clickbait' actually is.
 

N_LaRUE

New member
Apr 3, 2013
28,641
0
0
Visit site
Now, if I may rebut, for the purposes of examining the idea. While acknowledging your opinion, I would like to respectfully suggest that although a unified system of PCs, tablets and phones is a very fine aim (and I can obviously see why Microsoft would want to go this way), it is more important (from Microsoft's perspective) to actually sell a decent number of each type of device. They are, after all, a corporation with shareholders, and they exist to make money for those shareholders. (*) Now, PCs are pretty well covered - no need for concern about Windows running on them. So far, tablets and phones have not been so successful. It seems to me that it's more urgent for Microsoft to get large numbers of tablets and phones into the market, than to preserve the purity of the brand. Otherwise the unified platform will not get off the ground, and perhaps others will build something more successful first.

The idea of the unified system is to supposed to help this situation. The idea is to have an app store suitable for desktop, tablet and phone. I have a feeling, and this is just a feeling, that future versions of Windows desktop will move away from a desktop type of environment. This is just speculation I have nothing to back that up with. So with their system you would technically only need to write one app for all three systems.

This leads us to the question of whether rebranding Windows Phone to, for example, Xbox phone (other suggestions are welcome) would help to increase sales. It seems I am in the minority here in thinking that it would, unless someone else would like to speak up?

The issue here is that Xbox represents their entertainment arm. Which is where I think they want to keep it. If anything I think you would end up with a Surface Phone first.

(*) The question of whether the primary purpose of a corporation is to make money for shareholders is an interesting one, but let's save that for another day.

To most shareholders, yes it would seem that.

Favouring a technology for objective reasons, or even subjective reasons (such as finding the UI aesthetically appealing) is fine, and I'm sure that's the case for you. On the other hand, I always find it hard to understand the "******" mentality, which seems to me to be like supporting a football team - i.e. not a rational thing, but a purely emotional one. Actually, in some ways it's even worse. In the right context, football fans will usually readily admit, and even complain about at great length, the failings of their team. Technology fanboys will never admit the failings of their chosen system.
(This comment is a digression, and not aimed at anyone here. I'm sure you all recognise what I'm saying.)

Couldn't agree more. I think people should use what suits their needs.

Well, I can only apologise if that was the case. If it was, you can rest assured that I was taught a fine lesson by being ridiculed for my choice of desktop operating system, disbelieved in reporting of my PC start up time, and accused (no doubt with excellent justification) of being clickbait (%) and a technology journalist's wet dream (although that comment said more about the writer than the reader).

(%): still not sure what 'clickbait' actually is.

clickbait = someone who clicks on online articles by tech journalist who purposely puts exaggerated titles to ensure people 'click' on them. Hence the 'wet dream' comment.

There was no argument about your PC startup time, the issue was people got the impression you were using that as a subjective experience of Windows, which it isn't. Also, I don't know why you use Linux. You can download W8 you know.
 
Last edited:

anony_mouse

Banned
Aug 10, 2013
1,042
0
0
Visit site
The idea of the unified system is to supposed to help this situation. The idea is to have an app store suitable for desktop, tablet and phone. I have a feeling, and this is just a feeling, that future versions of Windows desktop will move away from a desktop type of environment. This is just speculation I have nothing to back that up with. So with their system you would technically only need to write one app for all three systems.

I'm sure Microsoft will sooner or later have one app store, and allow one app to run across all types of device. I also suspect Microsoft planned to move away from the desktop on PCs, but I think this might have changed following the negative reaction to the Metro UI on the desktop. Yes - I'm making another assertion that a Microsoft technology is unpopular! I will produce some evidence - well, at least statistics suggesting that Metro doesn't seem to be used that much by desktop users. See this report - https://www.soluto.com/reports. The thing is, I think (no evidence) that the traditional desktop is actually a pretty efficient way to display multiple applications. Right now, I have a web browser open, my e-mail open behind it (and I can see the inbox so I know when something has arrived), and a document and a file explorer open on my other monitor. All are visible and usable just by moving the mouse. No weird key combinations. Now, this arrangement doesn't work well on a tablet, which has limited screen space and no mouse, so MS were quite right to do something different there, but it is (in my opinion which I offer without supporting evidence) a good way to use a desktop.
This leaves our friends at MS in a tricky position, but they are clever girls and boys and there is an obvious solution. Allow Metro apps to run in a window on the desktop. Probably this isn't even very hard. With Windows 8.1, Metro apps can be resized more or less arbitrarily, so it should be possible to run them in a resizable, movable window. API extensions could allow these apps to provide a tradition menu when running on the desktop.
To summarise - I agree that Metro apps and a single app store are the way forward (hopefully not so locked down that apps can't be installed on desktop machine by other routes). I don't think the traditional desktop will disappear, as it's too familar and useful. Getting rid of it would push a lot of people on to other platforms (in my opinion which I offer without supporting evidence).

The issue here is that Xbox represents their entertainment arm. Which is where I think they want to keep it. If anything I think you would end up with a Surface Phone first.

Surface is also a good suggestion. It's a tricky one... 'Windows' emphasises the phone OS's integration with desktop and tablet, and maybe the business features. 'Xbox' emphasises games and entertainment - which is also a very important use case for the phone. As for 'Surface', I'm not sure what that stands for in consumers' minds.
So, if I was Microsoft (which obviously I'm not. Microsoft is a corporation and I'm only a person), I would decide how I wanted to market WP, and deciede whether to change the name then. If I wanted to promote business use, 'Windows' is maybe a good choice (assuming it doesn't have any negative associations). To promote games and entertainment uses, 'Xbox' would be better.

clickbait = someone who clicks on online articles by tech journalist who purposely puts exaggerated titles to ensure people 'click' on them. Hence the 'wet dream' comment.

Can't remember who called me that (not you, I'm sure!). Seems like an insult, no? I fear the work of an Apple ******, hidden in our midst. Ladies and Gentlemen - beware!

There was no argument about your PC startup time, the issue was people got the impression you were using that as a subjective experience of Windows, which it isn't.

My PC start up time is not a subjective experience of Windows. It is an objective experience of Windows. Objective meaning it can be dispassionately measured (as the dictionary says: "Not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts"). Believe me, I have measured it.
Now, I don't want to start this up again, so let's put this in context. Do some other people have similar experiences? Yes. I have met them. Some are sitting within mere metres of me as I write.
Is it a typical experience? I don't know.
A universal experience? No.
But it is most definitely an objective experience of Windows.

Also, I don't know why you use Linux. You can download W8 you know.

I could explain why I use Linux but to be honest it's quite boring and I don't think anyone here would be terribly interested.
I didn't know you could download Windows 8. Indeed, we learn something every day. If they made a version that would upgrade from Linux while preserving all my data and automatically install equivalents for all my applications, I might even be interested. Otherwise, I have better things to do than switch over. It's only an OS.
 

martinmc78

New member
Oct 30, 2012
2,745
0
0
Visit site
Can't remember who called me that (not you, I'm sure!). Seems like an insult, no? I fear the work of an Apple ******, hidden in our midst. Ladies and Gentlemen - beware!

It was me. It wasn't an insult either.

The reference I made to a "Tech journalists clickbait wet dream" was in reference to your original comments which seemed to pull in almost every negative aspect they find about Microsoft into succinct paragraphs as if you had pasted from several different sites and tried to pass it off as your own view.
 

N_LaRUE

New member
Apr 3, 2013
28,641
0
0
Visit site
Can't remember who called me that (not you, I'm sure!). Seems like an insult, no? I fear the work of an Apple ******, hidden in our midst. Ladies and Gentlemen - beware!

I don't think he's an Apple ******! No, not really an insult.

I could explain why I use Linux but to be honest it's quite boring and I don't think anyone here would be terribly interested.
I didn't know you could download Windows 8. Indeed, we learn something every day. If they made a version that would upgrade from Linux while preserving all my data and automatically install equivalents for all my applications, I might even be interested. Otherwise, I have better things to do than switch over. It's only an OS.

No need to explain why you like Linux. Lots of people like it for their own reasons. As it is, if your computer is up to date enough you can install W8 and still have Linux on your machine. It's known as a dual boot system. The other option, if you have a desktop, is to put the W8 partition on a separate hard drive and then do the dual boot.

You can look into it here. How to dual-boot Windows 8 and Linux

There may be other options for you since you have Linux on already.
 

stmav

Retired Moderator
Sep 18, 2012
3,684
0
0
Visit site
If your PC is taking that long to boot up, then your IT department needs to look at how they are loading images when setting up computers. Or just how they are connecting to the domain. Or what is the hardware of the computer. That is not a normal or acceptable time. I've been supporting enterprises, networks and domains for almost 20 years and that is not an experience of windows unless they have pooched the install or have specialized scripts running. One company I contract to has every OS from Win2k (due to some ancient testing equipment) through XP, Vista, Windows 7 and a couple of Windows 8 computers. Even the 2K computers take no longer than 2-3 minutes. I'd say it's more an objective experience of who's running your network.
 

squire777

New member
Feb 21, 2012
1,345
0
0
Visit site
I would like to see evidence on how the Windows brand is looked at negatively by the majority of consumers. If it was as bad as our new friend makes it out to be then there would have been a mass adoption of Mac OS and Linux a long time ago. Of course he has no evidence and is basing it on (made up?) personal experiences while asking those who argue against him to provide evidence of their arguments.

Of course if you hang around Apple or Android communities you will have a skewed view of Microsoft. All of those people making out-dated BSOD jokes, and writing "M$" over and over again are probably the same people that claim to have 10 minute boot times and viruses all over their computers.
 

kbilly70

New member
Nov 5, 2012
120
0
0
Visit site
Specifically, which ones?

Been meaning to get back to this thread but it's the last week of the year for me at work and am scrambling to prepare for audit. :confused:

I was trying to point out that you seem to scold others for the very thing you did earlier in yours posts - making broad statements regarding the perceptions of people who use Windows. Reading through the thread now it looks like it has been discussed at length so probably no reason to go over it more.

Back on topic, as others have stated I think dropping Windows from the phone would go against Microsoft's vision of a unified platform/ecosystem and that it would hurt them to do so now. As to using Xbox branding on the phone I think it could have a negative impact on the enterprise sector because it may be looked at as more of a toy than a serious business device.

I do agree with your earlier remarks regarding cheap phones and marketing.
 

tgp

New member
Dec 1, 2012
4,519
0
0
Visit site
Of course if you hang around Apple or Android communities you will have a skewed view of Microsoft. All of those people making out-dated BSOD jokes, and writing "M$" over and over again are probably the same people that claim to have 10 minute boot times and viruses all over their computers.

To be fair, this description of Microsoft is not unlike what people say about Android. Microsoft earned this reputation back in the day, and likewise Android earned its reputation of lag, viruses (I guess they did; I've never seen or even heard of any), and crashes. Both Microsoft and Android have made big strides in these areas recently, making these accusations without merit, at least if you have a modern device with a modern OS version.
 

anony_mouse

Banned
Aug 10, 2013
1,042
0
0
Visit site
It was me. It wasn't an insult either.

The reference I made to a "Tech journalists clickbait wet dream" was in reference to your original comments which seemed to pull in almost every negative aspect they find about Microsoft into succinct paragraphs as if you had pasted from several different sites and tried to pass it off as your own view.

Are you suggesting that I don't have those issues with my work laptop? Are you, in fact, suggesting that I was lying?
 

anony_mouse

Banned
Aug 10, 2013
1,042
0
0
Visit site
No need to explain why you like Linux. Lots of people like it for their own reasons. As it is, if your computer is up to date enough you can install W8 and still have Linux on your machine. It's known as a dual boot system. The other option, if you have a desktop, is to put the W8 partition on a separate hard drive and then do the dual boot.

You can look into it here. How to dual-boot Windows 8 and Linux

There may be other options for you since you have Linux on already.

Not really interested in dual booting. I am very familiar with the concept. It would just add a layer of inconvenience and cost for no gain. My home PC is mostly a file store, a web browser, CV editor, print terminal and occasional Spotify player. All work fine on Linux. I'm not suggesting that Windows can't do these things - I'm sure it can - but switching would be expensive and time consuming and I can't see any advantage in my case.
 

anony_mouse

Banned
Aug 10, 2013
1,042
0
0
Visit site
I would like to see evidence on how the Windows brand is looked at negatively by the majority of consumers. If it was as bad as our new friend makes it out to be then there would have been a mass adoption of Mac OS and Linux a long time ago. Of course he has no evidence and is basing it on (made up?) personal experiences while asking those who argue against him to provide evidence of their arguments.

Of course if you hang around Apple or Android communities you will have a skewed view of Microsoft. All of those people making out-dated BSOD jokes, and writing "M$" over and over again are probably the same people that claim to have 10 minute boot times and viruses all over their computers.

Oh, another person claiming I was lying! Although you also call me a friend so maybe there is hope yet.

As you may have read, I have used Microsoft computers as a user and a developer for a very long time. I even wrote drivers for
Windows (maybe you used one of them). I suspect I know more about the internal workings of operating systems including Windows than the average person in this forum. Operating systems are quite interesting. What's your view of the Windows NT micro kernel architecture (as used in Windows Phone 8)? Superior to the monolithic approach of Linux (as used in Android)? Has the micro kernel architecture contributed to the slow take up of Windows Phone?

I do not hang around Android or Apple forums. I doubt I have viruses on my work PC as it has full and up to date anti virus software courtesy of the IT department.
 
Last edited:

Reflexx

New member
Dec 30, 2010
4,484
4
0
Visit site
Oh, another person claiming I was lying! Although you also call me a friend so maybe there is hope yet.

As you may have read, I have used Microsoft computers as a user and a developer for a very long time. I even wrote drivers for
Windows (maybe you used one of them). I suspect I know more about the internal workings of operating systems including Windows than the average person in this forum. Operating systems are quite interesting. What's your view of the Windows NT micro kernel architecture (as used in Windows Phone 8)? Superior to the monolithic approach of Linux (as used in Android)? Has the micro kernel architecture contributed to the slow take up of Windows Phone?

I do not hang around Android or Apple forums. I doubt I have viruses on my work PC as it has full and up to date anti virus software courtesy of the IT department.

What did any of that have to do with the Windows name being a negative?
 

N_LaRUE

New member
Apr 3, 2013
28,641
0
0
Visit site
If your PC is taking that long to boot up, then your IT department needs to look at how they are loading images when setting up computers. Or just how they are connecting to the domain. Or what is the hardware of the computer. That is not a normal or acceptable time. I've been supporting enterprises, networks and domains for almost 20 years and that is not an experience of windows unless they have pooched the install or have specialized scripts running. One company I contract to has every OS from Win2k (due to some ancient testing equipment) through XP, Vista, Windows 7 and a couple of Windows 8 computers. Even the 2K computers take no longer than 2-3 minutes. I'd say it's more an objective experience of who's running your network.

You should contract your services to my company. I have the worst W7 image ever. I'm pretty sure it's stuffed. They're unfortunately using Dells and IBM security systems. My computer is slow and unstable, something a W7 machine shouldn't be. I think think their IT systems are antiquated.
 

anony_mouse

Banned
Aug 10, 2013
1,042
0
0
Visit site
What did any of that have to do with the Windows name being a negative?

I think we've moved on from that, unless you have something to add. I agreed that everyone in the world thinks Windows is great. Once we actually got round to discussing it, no one liked my idea of changing the name of Windows Phone, despite my literary efforts. So I'm thinking of other factors that might help Windows Phone to gain market share (as per the title of the thread). Perhaps you have some ideas?

Back to the operating systems theory perspective... Does anyone have a view on the kernel architecture of Windows NT and it's relevance to Windows market share? Personally I think it is relevant, as NT is a hugely more solid basis to build on than WinCE as used in WP7. I don't have to tell you, I'm sure, that WP8 uses NT. The increased reliability alone is a major improvement and more than makes up for any possible reduction in performance relative to WinCE (which is anyway a debatable point on a modern processor). In fact, I would suggest Microsoft should push this to its logical conclusion and go for a single, modular code base for all the Windows platforms. Now, you might ask why a user should care about this. Well, it will reduce costs in the long run, which should make Windows Phone cheaper. It will enable all kinds of variants to be created to fill whatever new device types we see in the future, while retaining deep compatibility with applications. And it will allow
Microsoft to really have a unified platform across all device types. The possibilities are endless.
It's interesting to compare this to other platforms. Both Android and iOS are also based in 'PC' operating systems but their runtime environments are perhaps less suited to platforms larger than a tablet - do you think?
(I realise this is not compatible with my suggestion to build Windows Phone on top of the Android, as a skin, but I already dropped that idea as no one liked it and whatever its advantages, it's not going to happen.)
 

anony_mouse

Banned
Aug 10, 2013
1,042
0
0
Visit site
Here's a point that must cause a lot of problems for Windows Phone in the market... people who like windows are often disappointed by Windows Phone because it doesn't really have a anything to do with windows. A totally different experience. Microsoft should make Windows Phone more like windows. Windows fans will then love it and tell all their friends.
Don't underestimate the number of people who like windows. The market penetration of windows is huge, far larger than even Android. I don't have any statistics to hand, so you will have to judge this one for yourself, but I would guess that over 90% of people have access to at least one window.
 

teckris

New member
Aug 7, 2013
819
0
0
Visit site
Here's a point that must cause a lot of problems for Windows Phone in the market... people who like windows are often disappointed by Windows Phone because it doesn't really have a anything to do with windows. A totally different experience. Microsoft should make Windows Phone more like windows. Windows fans will then love it and tell all their friends.
Don't underestimate the number of people who like windows. The market penetration of windows is huge, far larger than even Android. I don't have any statistics to hand, so you will have to judge this one for yourself, but I would guess that over 90% of people have access to at least one window.

MS please listen to this One... bring the Windows to WP...!! close buttons and a top bar with name of application.. start menu... what else??
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
322,914
Messages
2,242,888
Members
428,004
Latest member
hetb