09-23-2014 02:55 PM
86 1234
tools
  1. chezm's Avatar
    No need to rename Bing or XBOX. Those brand names are well known and unique.
    With that said, maybe it would be better to just call it Xbox mobile, or Xbox phone. ya I'm not a fan of the name, but it would draw in a large younger market.
    08-31-2014 07:35 PM
  2. Jazmac's Avatar
    With that said, maybe it would be better to just call it Xbox mobile, or Xbox phone. ya I'm not a fan of the name, but it would draw in a large younger market.
    You mention younger market and it is really an interesting point. Microsoft has been in our lives for so many years, its name is ubiquitous with names like your local power company, gas company, Southwest Airlines, hell, your mobile carrier for that matter. Not too many feel love for either like that but we put up with them because we have to. That said, can Microsoft have that kind of appeal to a younger crowd like Galaxy and Iphone are? Can Microsoft ever be that level of "cool"? Yes Windows Phone is very good but could Microsoft ever reach "cool" status?
    chezm likes this.
    08-31-2014 10:26 PM
  3. MaxyBley's Avatar
    This is interesting. I don't really think they would go on calling it that. Because somehow they have to differentiate the phone version and the PC version.
    08-31-2014 10:38 PM
  4. Vicky Krishnatrai's Avatar
    Actually, Microsoft have a big plan. We can not say what is going to be?
    08-31-2014 11:20 PM
  5. jojoe42's Avatar
    I don't understand all the fuss about people who say "oh, people will get all confused because they won't know whether their version of Windows will run their windows programs"....why? x86 machines can run apps from the Store, given the fact that the next version of Windows will have a unified kernel and OS underneath, only changing the UI it seems that XBO, WP and Windows devices can all run apps from the Store. The only confusion I can see is if people get confused about wanting to run .exe files on the ARM version of Windows, and even then Atom processors are catching up - I'm starting to see more and more entry-level tablets running Atom processors instead, so I'd imagine MS might do something similar with the next Surface. And seriously, no-one can expect their Windows Phone to run an old .exe file, nor the XBO. So they could get away with naming the next version "Windows".

    However, I think just calling it "Windows" by itself is a little confusing - "Which version of Windows are you running?" "Windows." "No, which version?" "WINDOWS!". Windows 9, Windows One (a little iffy) I don't mind really....as long as it isn't called Bing Windows....that's pretty bad
    Jazmac likes this.
    09-01-2014 03:57 AM
  6. Shobin Drogan's Avatar
    The shorter, the better if you ask me.
    09-01-2014 04:11 AM
  7. TechFreak1's Avatar
    I can see it now... the average joe and the self pro-claimed tech bloggers alike calling it Windows Mobile.. I mean some still have a hard time distinguishing "Windows Phone" and "Windows Mobile". This branding has a major caveat, Windows phone does not run your standard x86 / x64 application and can be perceived as miss selling by the average consumer expecting run full blown photo shop on their 6" 1520.

    You cannot create a selling point on a technicality, it is similar to including storage space of a built-in wardrobe on a floorplan as habitable space in a sales brochure. (Although it is usable space but it is not livable space therefore must never be included as it skews the price per sq ft of the property and has other legal ramifications).

    Also I have been hearing rumours that MS will do away with yearly updates and will update the desktop windows on a monthly basis with features therefore negating a Windows 10 release. Which make sense as they already do this via patch Tuesday, the x1 is currently updated monthly and the surface line is somewhat updated monthly. I doubt we will see monthly updates for windows phone though, however I could be wrong :P.
    09-01-2014 06:50 AM
  8. a5cent's Avatar
    This branding has a major caveat, Windows phone does not run your standard x86 / x64 application and can be perceived as miss selling by the average consumer expecting run full blown photo shop on their 6" 1520.
    Keep in mind that the incompatibilities are not primarily due to hardware (x86 vs ARM).

    Above someone mentioned Atom tablets, but even these will not be able to run x86 based Windows programs on tablets or phones. Why? Because the future version of WP (that will also run on tablets) lacks all the functionality related to the windows desktop. Actually, it lacks almost everything that was part of the Windows OS for the last 20 years. That is easily demonstrated by looking at Windows RT which is a 7GB install, whereas the next version of WP will still require just a couple hundred MB, similar to iOS and Android. That is important, because requiring 7GB has made it impossible for Windows RT tablets to compete with Android tablets on price.

    That is the fundamental difference between the future version of WP (that will also run on tablets), and MS' current tablet OS which is just normal Windows without the ability to install desktop apps. Those are two completely different things, with or without x86 support.

    Being two completely different things justifies having different names IMHO.
    Last edited by a5cent; 09-01-2014 at 08:50 AM.
    09-01-2014 07:55 AM
  9. wuiyang's Avatar
    windows 10 should be Windows One (like XBox)
    Last edited by wuiyang; 09-01-2014 at 08:47 AM. Reason: grammar misleading
    rdubmu likes this.
    09-01-2014 08:46 AM
  10. jojoe42's Avatar
    Keep in mind that the incompatibilities are not primarily due to hardware (x86 vs ARM).

    Above someone mentioned Atom tablets, but even these will not be able to run x86 based Windows programs on tablets or phones. Why? Because the future version of WP (that will also run on tablets) lacks all the functionality related to the windows desktop. Actually, it lacks almost everything that was part of the Windows OS for the last 20 years. That is easily demonstrated by looking at Windows RT which is a 7GB install, whereas the next version of WP will still require just a couple hundred MB, similar to iOS and Android. That is important, because requiring 7GB has made it impossible for Windows RT tablets to compete with Android tablets on price.

    That is the fundamental difference between the future version of WP (that will also run on tablets), and MS' current tablet OS which is just normal Windows without the ability to install desktop apps. Those are two completely different things, with or without x86 support.

    Being two completely different things justifies having different names IMHO.
    iOS takes up a couple of gigs of storage alone ya know, not a couple of megabytes. I really hope they don't cut out the desktop on something like my Surface - I spend half my time in the desktop on that thing.

    And technically Atom tablets can run x86 programs, it just depends on how MS implements it.
    09-01-2014 02:07 PM
  11. jojoe42's Avatar
    Keep in mind that the incompatibilities are not primarily due to hardware (x86 vs ARM).

    Above someone mentioned Atom tablets, but even these will not be able to run x86 based Windows programs on tablets or phones. Why? Because the future version of WP (that will also run on tablets) lacks all the functionality related to the windows desktop. Actually, it lacks almost everything that was part of the Windows OS for the last 20 years. That is easily demonstrated by looking at Windows RT which is a 7GB install, whereas the next version of WP will still require just a couple hundred MB, similar to iOS and Android. That is important, because requiring 7GB has made it impossible for Windows RT tablets to compete with Android tablets on price.

    That is the fundamental difference between the future version of WP (that will also run on tablets), and MS' current tablet OS which is just normal Windows without the ability to install desktop apps. Those are two completely different things, with or without x86 support.

    Being two completely different things justifies having different names IMHO.
    iOS takes up a couple of gigs of storage alone ya know, not a couple of megabytes. I really hope they don't cut out the desktop on something like my Surface - I spend half my time in the desktop on that thing.

    And technically Atom tablets can run x86 programs, it just depends on how MS implements it. Pretty sure they won't completely cut out the desktop from Windows, even on tablets
    09-01-2014 02:07 PM
  12. a5cent's Avatar
    iOS takes up a couple of gigs of storage alone ya know, not a couple of megabytes. I really hope they don't cut out the desktop on something like my Surface - I spend half my time in the desktop on that thing..
    Ehm, no, but granted, iOS is by far the fattest of the three. It occupies about 1.4 GB. That would be 14 hundred megabytes, and I did say hundreds of megabytes, not just "a couple megabytes" as you've falsely implied.

    You are likely refering to the fact that to download, unpack, and install iOS requires about 3GB of free storage space, but that is irrelevant in this context.

    WP clocks in around 400 megabytes. AOSP Android can be even smaller.

    The point is, again, that these are all much leaner and cheaper to accommodate than a full blown Windows/RT installation of 7GB or more.

    Finally, I never said MS would cut out the desktop on your surface (Pro). Such devices will continue to ship with full blown Windows, just as they do today. Completely different topic. However, MS will completely remove it from the simpler Surface (non Pro) tablets... they already kind of have.

    And technically Atom tablets can run x86 programs, it just depends on how MS implements it.
    Technically, yes. So? Again, that is completely irrelevant to my point.

    I think your reaction kind of proves how refering to both OS' by the same name would just confuse people.
    Last edited by a5cent; 09-01-2014 at 03:22 PM.
    Laura Knotek likes this.
    09-01-2014 02:58 PM
  13. DoctorSaline's Avatar
    But atom can still run full windows(including desktop mode).

    Just imagine an atom based phone which has desktop mode disabled by default but when attached to a dock at your working station, bingo! You have a full working PC. You can attach accessories through docking station. About that internal memory, you could always use 64gb internal. Can this be the next surface phone? Possibilities are endless if MS could just hurry it up.
    Laura Knotek and rodan01 like this.
    09-01-2014 03:00 PM
  14. a5cent's Avatar
    Just imagine an atom based phone which has desktop mode disabled by default but when attached to a dock at your working station, bingo! You have a full working PC.
    That is definitely possible, and I think it would be awesome.

    However, just to be clear, that wouldn't run the merged Phone/RT OS MS is currently working on.
    DoctorSaline likes this.
    09-01-2014 03:06 PM
  15. twint7787's Avatar
    Like others have said. Windows 9 Mobile is fine. You could also say Windows 9 Phone. Either way its cool
    09-01-2014 03:15 PM
  16. kklemn's Avatar
    or if they release desktop and mobile versions at the same time they could be just windows 9 and windows 9m. just add m to mobile os.
    09-01-2014 03:26 PM
  17. colinkiama's Avatar
    or if they release desktop and mobile versions at the same time they could be just windows 9 and windows 9m. just add m to mobile os.
    No. People already call them windows 8 phones so why not just call the OS windows. We are still gonna call them windows phones anyway anyway lol.
    09-01-2014 03:33 PM
  18. DoctorSaline's Avatar
    That is definitely possible, and I think it would be awesome.

    However, just to be clear, that wouldn't run the merged Phone/RT OS MS is currently working on.
    Why not?

    From what I understand
    -There is Full Windows. It has two components:
    1) Modern UI(WinRT)
    2) Desktop UI(Win32)

    -There is Windows RT. Currently it has two components:
    1) Modern UI(WinRT)
    2) Desktop UI(Win32 for ARM; locked down)

    -There is Windows Phone. Currently it has only one component.
    1) Modern UI(WinPRT; since WP8.1)
    NO DESKTOP UI

    It remains to be seen how Microsoft implements Threshold.

    From what I see, Threshold will mean:

    -Shared code or subset of a greater code in Modern UI.
    - No Desktop UI in Phones and tablets. (According to sources).

    It remains to be seen if they completely remove Desktop UI or just disable it. Technically, from what I understand, Desktop UI is an independent component that MS can attach and bundle with anything if they so desire, given the compatible hardware i-e
    -Desktop UI(win32)
    on Intel X86/64 and atom chipsets.
    -Desktop UI(win32 for ARM; currently locked down) on ARM chipsets.

    If they could code some sort of universal ModernUI, the possibilities will be endless.

    Am I right? Or did I mix things up? Lol.
    09-01-2014 03:38 PM
  19. colinkiama's Avatar
    Why not?

    From what I understand
    -There is Full Windows. It has two components:
    1) Modern UI(WinRT)
    2) Desktop UI(Win32)

    -There is Windows RT. Currently it has two components:
    1) Modern UI(WinRT)
    2) Desktop UI(Win32 for ARM; locked down)

    -There is Windows Phone. Currently it has only one component.
    1) Modern UI(WinPRT; since WP8.1)
    NO DESKTOP UI

    It remains to be seen how Microsoft implements Threshold.

    From what I see, Threshold will mean:

    -Shared code or subset of a greater code in Modern UI.
    - No Desktop UI in Phones and tablets. (According to sources).

    It remains to be seen if they completely remove Desktop UI or just disable it. Technically, from what I understand, Desktop UI is an independent component that MS can attach and bundle with anything if they so desire, given the compatible hardware i-e
    -Desktop UI(win32)
    on Intel X86/64 and atom chipsets.
    -Desktop UI(win32 for ARM; currently locked down) on ARM chipsets.

    If they could code some sort of universal ModernUI, the possibilities will be endless.

    Am I right? Or did I mix things up? Lol.
    Nailed it.
    DoctorSaline likes this.
    09-01-2014 03:47 PM
  20. anon(5408816)'s Avatar
    Could see it like this:

    Windows - ARM
    Windows Professional - x86 / x64
    Windows Enterprise - x86 / x64
    Windows Server - x86 / x64
    Windows Embedded - Other
    Sent from my Lumia Icon
    09-01-2014 04:14 PM
  21. a5cent's Avatar
    Am I right? Or did I mix things up? Lol.
    Nice summary! I think you got almost everything right. Here is the bit that isn't:

    The Windows RT SKU will be killed, but all of the modern UI features we associate with Windows/RT will be ported over to WP. I've been saying this for a long time already, and we are just now starting to hear about the first such features making it into WP, like split screen support (known as the snap feature in the modern UI).

    MS will therefore neither remove the desktop component nor just disable it. It will just never have existed in the OS that will end up running on phones and cheaper tablets.

    While you are correct that the desktop is a separate component, that isn't enough for desktop applications to run reliably. To reliably run any desktop software, we also need the other gigabytes worth of functionality that ships with Windows. As I already explained, this completely screws up any chances MS has of making Windows tablets cost competitive with cheap Android tablets. MS needs a tablet option without the legacy baggage. That is what this "merged" Phone/RT OS is. That is why you won't see Windows programs running on that OS.

    Of course, there is nothing stopping MS from installing full blown windows on tablets (like the surface Pro) or future phones, but that will come at a cost (storage space, power consumption, etc) that not every device can afford to bare.
    DoctorSaline likes this.
    09-01-2014 05:23 PM
  22. DoctorSaline's Avatar
    Nice summary! I think you got almost everything right. Here is the bit that isn't:

    The Windows RT SKU will be killed, but all of the modern UI features we associate with Windows/RT will be ported over to WP. I've been saying this for a long time already, and we are just now starting to hear about the first such features making it into WP, like split screen support (known as the snap feature in the modern UI).

    MS will therefore neither remove the desktop component nor just disable it. It will just never have existed in the OS that will end up running on phones and cheaper tablets.

    While you are correct that the desktop is a separate component, that isn't enough for desktop applications to run reliably. To reliably run any desktop software, we also need the other gigabytes worth of functionality that ships with Windows. As I already explained, this completely screws up any chances MS has of making Windows tablets cost competitive with cheap Android tablets. MS needs a tablet option without the legacy baggage. That is what this "merged" Phone/RT OS is. That is why you won't see Windows programs running on that OS.

    Of course, there is nothing stopping MS from installing full blown windows on tablets (like the surface Pro) or future phones, but that will come at a cost (storage space, power consumption, etc) that not every device can afford to bare.
    Thank you for the explanation. Of course, I understand what you mean. It would be impossible to squeeze 'pc experience' in budget offerings.

    But, flagship surface phone with atom chipset may do wonders for MS in enterprise or people who have to work on MS suite of office apps on daily basis. Although of course Intel would have to come through on this. A processor that is not only efficient to run full windows but also gives a longer battery life. But considering what MS has achieved with Surface Pro 3, I wouldn't be surprised if they do it again.

    Another, lazy way of doing it would be to use ARM. It might solve the problem of battery and power. A tegra k1 based phone with desktop UI(when needed) which already has Office2013(recompiled for ARM). But that would probably suffer the same fate as Surface 2 due to locked down nature of desktop(on ARM) and not being able to run legacy apps. Although, I'm surprised MS hasn't tried it already.

    Exciting times ahead. Let's hope MS execute it properly this time.
    a5cent likes this.
    09-01-2014 06:03 PM
  23. rodan01's Avatar
    Thank you for the explanation. Of course, I understand what you mean. It would be impossible to squeeze 'pc experience' in budget offerings.

    But, flagship surface phone with atom chipset may do wonders for MS in enterprise or people who have to work on MS suite of office apps on daily basis. Although of course Intel would have to come through on this. A processor that is not only efficient to run full windows but also gives a longer battery life. But considering what MS has achieved with Surface Pro 3, I wouldn't be surprised if they do it again.

    Another, lazy way of doing it would be to use ARM. It might solve the problem of battery and power. A tegra k1 based phone with desktop UI(when needed) which already has Office2013(recompiled for ARM). But that would probably suffer the same fate as Surface 2 due to locked down nature of desktop(on ARM) and not being able to run legacy apps. Although, I'm surprised MS hasn't tried it already.

    Exciting times ahead. Let's hope MS execute it properly this time.
    It's an interesting value proposition that phones or tablet could provide productivity experience when connected to a screen/keyboard/mouse, but the apps in the big-screen experience should the same phone/tablet apps with an UI optimized keyboard and mouse, not the legacy win32 apps that can't be integrated with the mobile OS and break the security model of the device.

    I think Threshold will introduce Desktop Store Apps. Apps developed with Winrt APIs but with an UI optimized for keyboard and mouse. These apps will have the same security constraints of the current Modern UI apps, will be published in the Windows Store and developer could reuse most of the code with the phone/tablet version.
    These are the kind of apps should run in a big-screen experience for phones and tablets. Legacy win32 apps should be only accessed through Remote Desktop.
    a5cent and DoctorSaline like this.
    09-01-2014 06:41 PM
  24. a5cent's Avatar
    But, flagship surface phone with atom chipset may do wonders for MS in enterprise or people who have to work on MS suite of office apps on daily basis.
    Yup, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying this won't or shouldn't happen. I think it's just a question of when. However, I don't think we will see such phones in this upcoming OS cycle. I'd gladly be mistaken, but I doubt it.

    Anyway, the point of all this was to discuss the differences between MS' upcoming mobile and laptop/desktop OSes, and why it doesn't make sense to give them one and the same name.

    Imagine we would. How would anybody know if such a future Windows smartphone ran the merged WP/RT OS (without Win32 desktop support) or the full blown Windows OS (with Win32 desktop support). We couldn't...
    DoctorSaline likes this.
    09-01-2014 06:53 PM
  25. YanivC's Avatar
    nononono. I love the XBox name. Why would they drop something that has such a loyal base? It took billions for create that brand recognition, ya can't just toss it out the window. I don't know.... I'm partial to Windows Phone.... because THAT'S what it is! It is not a "windows", it is a "windows" device. Which device I prithee? A phone... a Windows Phone :)
    As for Surface, that's just the model of the device, not the platform.
    09-02-2014 12:46 PM
86 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-12-2014, 07:58 AM
  2. From HTC 8S to 8X
    By BataBole in forum HTC 8X
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 09-06-2014, 05:36 PM
  3. Everything you need to know about Microsoft's #MoreLumia event in Berlin
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-03-2014, 02:56 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-02-2014, 06:51 PM
  5. Icon Will Not Charge to 100%
    By WPCentral Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-02-2014, 10:18 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD