The Surface Phone?

[Norris Rochelle]

There's a ton of gossip flooding the internet about Microsoft's Surface Phone. There's talk of the phone releasing mid 2017 and some talk of a later date. What makes this a big deal is the opportunity Microsoft has here. Windows 10 Mobile is finally on older Windows Phones as well as the latest ones. The mobile OS looks and feels great, we have lots of new Windows 10 ready devices and the phones compliment the OS' ecosystem. Microsoft spends plenty of money confidently promoting their Azure, SQL and Cloud projects but spend little to no money on promoting Windows Phone. Our phones are equipped with excellent software/hardware, a powerful OS, the best digital assistant in the world and a solid community . With the Lumia line being temporarily discontinued Microsoft would be smart to capitalize off of this idea. If the Surface Phone came out Microsoft could make two versions by making one a middle end device and making the other a high end device. Microsoft is great when it comes to making middle end devices and seeing this would please a lot of people. The middle ranged Surface Phone could be the size of the 640 XL while the high ranged one could be a phablet. Either way, there's tons of possibilities. What do you think the Surface Phone is going to be like and do you think the rumors are true?

 

[fdalbor]

re:

What older phones is W10 mobile on. The release date spoken of is a year to a year and a half away. Much to long a wait to have much of a chance for success.

 

[Zulfigar]

re:

What older phones is W10 mobile on. The release date spoken of is a year to a year and a half away. Much to long a wait to have much of a chance for success.

Actually, it might be the perfect time, since the phone market is slowing down because of lack of innovation. Phones now a days all have the same thing, better cameras, screens, and speed. Sure, that's great, but what else is there? What ground-breaking feature has anyone come up with?

Let the phone market slow down some more, then let Microsoft come along with the next generation of Continuum that can run x86 apps and become the first true Pocket PC.

By the way OP, if Daniel got it right, there's going to be three versions.

 

[slyronit]

re:

Lol the Surface phones were supposed to Have Intel Atom processors, which are now cancelled.

 

[Chalanthorn Chanmathikornkul]

re:

What if microsoft just make their own chip?

 

[slyronit]

re:

That is not going to happen. Intel has a near-monopoly in the production of x64 chips, even AMD hasn't been able to keep up in the last few years. You cannot just start making chips without chip making experience.

 

[Norris Rochelle]

re:

What older phones is W10 mobile on. The release date spoken of is a year to a year and a half away. Much to long a wait to have much of a chance for success.

Windows 10 Mobile is live for older Nokia devices This includes the 1520, 930, 640, 640XL, 730, 735, 830, 532, 535, 540, 635 1GB, 636 1GB, 638 1GB, 430, 435, etc. I believe there's plenty of opportunities with Windows Phone. With W10 Mobile finally rolling out to the main phones that Microsoft's sales come from, we have a chance to show them how awesome Windows Phone is. With the release date so far away maybe this was all planned? Microsoft released new phone's ready for W10 Mobile and temporarily stopped the Lumia series. With another official Flagship being so far away this gives other Manufacture's the chance to release Phones with W10 Mobile already on them. I've supported Windows Mobile/Phone for a very long time and can tell you that shipping W10 Mobile is critical part of Windows Phones future. The official update is stable and works fine. Take a look at all of the awesome Windows Phones that are coming out HP Elite X3, Liquid Jade Primo and more. I see plenty of room for success. This is Windows Phones year. We just need more promotion.

 

[kwright62]

re:

The popular press for investors is making it clear Intel will not supply mobile processors anytime soon. Qualcomm will be happy to ship the chips for the next generation of smart "phones". This reality bodes extremely well for any OS that bridges both architectures (Continuum).

 

[Keith Wallace]

re:

I can't say I agree with much of anything here. W10M is still a mess with getting software, and I find the new design of pop-out menus to be a drastic step back from its predecessor's pivots and gesture-based navigation. The OS launched as a hack job, and it's still pretty much that.

Thinking about what the Surface Phone could be, I'm not as excited as I was. That Atom is dead is a problem. Maybe Core m can shrink and be its replacement, but an ARM-based Surface Phone doesn't move the needle much for me, unless they have a newer Continuum device that can run x86 software. On ARM, it's just a Lumia with a metal body, and probably a light-colored one I find unattractive at that.

It's been so long since this platform took a step in the right direction with hardware that I'm just going to spend the next year waiting, in the hopes Microsoft finally foes what it hasn't in the 2 years since it bought Nokia--release a phone with high-end specs that doesn't have bad aesthetics (something that every Lumia after the 1520 struggled with) or build quality issues.

 

[slyronit]

re:

Whatever they do now, they should not release the device prematurely like they did with the SP3, SP4, the SB and the Lumia 950/XL. All of these came without proper testing, buggy firmware and software and has cost MS a lot, in bad press and negative publicity & burnt loyal MS fans who paid a premium for these devices.

MS needs to take its time and release a device which works Out of the Box, from day 1.

 

[a5cent]

re:

The popular press for investors is making it clear Intel will not supply mobile processors anytime soon. Qualcomm will be happy to ship the chips for the next generation of smart "phones". This reality bodes extremely well for any OS that bridges both architectures (Continuum).

Confusion abounds as to what Continuum is, and unfortunately, the tech press isn't doing much to help correct that.

Continuum does absolutely nothing to bridge CPU architectures. Continuum has absolutely nothing to do with ARM, x86, or any other instruction set. It's about one thing and one thing only, and that is to allow the OS and the software that runs on it to dynamically adapt to different screen sizes. This is MS' own definition:

Continuum is a new, adaptive user experience offered in Windows 10 that optimizes the look and behavior of apps and the Windows shell for the physical form factor and customer's usage preferences.
source

That feature, which we call Continuum, is completely independent of anything CPU related. In terms of hardware, Continuum is dependent solely on the GPU's ability to drive a second screen, but that has absolutely nothing to do with CPU instruction sets.

 

[a5cent]

re:

Thinking about what the Surface Phone could be, I'm not as excited as I was. That Atom is dead is a problem. Maybe Core m can shrink and be its replacement, but an ARM-based Surface Phone doesn't move the needle much for me, unless they have a newer Continuum device that can run x86 software.

This is the type of situation where "be careful what you wish for" is good advice.

I think most people looking forward to running Win32 desktop software directly on their phone would end up being very disappointed with the resulting user experience. Most will end up blaming MS for again releasing a half baked solution, while ignoring that their wish never had a chance of being anything more than a half baked solution in the first place. I don't think that's a good idea.

There is more than one way to skin a cat however.

If I were an executive at MS, this is what I'd do:

1)
Clearly communicate that running Win32 based desktop software directly on very small and resource constrained devices was always a bad idea that MS never supported. It was just something hyped by the tech press. Even when we eventually get to the point where we can run desktop software reasonably well on a high-end 5" smartphone, we must not forget that Continuum spans all form factors. That means there will always be some smaller form factor that is left out of that vision (4" phones, smart watches, IoT devices, clothing implants, etc), making this an incomplete solution (at best).

2)
Introduce a technology that allows consumers to very easily initiate a remote desktop connection to any other device registered on their MS account. If the device you're connecting to isn't already powered-on, it would be on-demand through your MS account. This would make any software installed on your tablet/laptop/desktop/server potentially accessible to any other W10(M) device, including your phone. This solves the problem you want solved (running Win32 based desktop software on a phone) while sidestepping all the drawbacks (uncontrollable battery drain, poor performance, not scaling to smaller devices, etc).

Last but not least, this setup works for any software (including CAD, video production, and most importantly, Crysis), and not just the select few that smartphones are currently able to cope with (banking and accounting... yawn), meaning it's a solution that can always work, as opposed to just some of the time.

3)
I imagine the technology would be based on some evolved/simplified/streamlined version of App-V. This would allow consumers to synchronize such evolved App-V instances to the cloud.

A synchronized App-V instance would make remote desktop access a highly available and reliable feature (it would work even if your kids unplug your computer at home, or if your home is susceptible to power outages), and also make it accessible to people who aren't comfortable letting MS turn on their computers automatically over the internet.

This would also be helpful for people who's phone is their sole computing device, as they'd be able to setup such a App-V instance directly through their MS account and not require a PC at all.

I imagine this could be offered for a few bucks a month per App-V instance, or be included in the Office 365 subscription.

4)
There are a ton of other things MS could do with a setup like this:

• Package the whole thing as a Windows Server feature so corporations could offer the same capabilities for their own software on their own networks for their private corporate user accounts.
• Allow users to contribute their computing resources to the App-V network, which MS would use to run other people's App-V instances (nothing would ever get installed on your machine), which would in turn allow you to access your own hosted App-V instances for an equal amount of time for free.
• etc

 

[Keith Wallace]

re:

This is the type of situation where "be careful what you wish for" is good advice.

I think most people looking forward to running Win32 desktop software directly on their phone would end up being very disappointed with the resulting user experience. Most will end up blaming MS for again releasing a half baked solution, while ignoring that their wish never had a chance of being anything more than a half baked solution in the first place. I don't think that's a good idea.

There is more than one way to skin a cat however.

If I were an executive at MS, this is what I'd do:

1)
Clearly communicate that running Win32 based desktop software directly on very small and resource constrained devices was always a bad idea that MS never supported. It was just something hyped by the tech press. Even when we eventually get to the point where we can run desktop software reasonably well on a high-end 5" smartphone, we must not forget that Continuum spans all form factors. That means there will always be some smaller form factor that is left out of that vision (4" phones, smart watches, IoT devices, clothing implants, etc), making this an incomplete solution (at best).

2)
Introduce a technology that allows consumers to very easily initiate a remote desktop connection to any other device registered on their MS account. If the device you're connecting to isn't already powered-on, it would be on-demand through your MS account. This would make any software installed on your tablet/laptop/desktop/server potentially accessible to any other W10(M) device, including your phone. This solves the problem you want solved (running Win32 based desktop software on a phone) while sidestepping all the drawbacks (uncontrollable battery drain, poor performance, not scaling to smaller devices, etc).

Last but not least, this setup works for any software (including CAD, video production, and most importantly, Crysis), and not just the select few that smartphones are currently able to cope with (banking and accounting... yawn), meaning it's a solution that can always work, as opposed to just some of the time.

3)
I imagine the technology would be based on some evolved/simplified/streamlined version of App-V. This would allow consumers to synchronize such evolved App-V instances to the cloud.

A synchronized App-V instance would make remote desktop access a highly available and reliable feature (it would work even if your kids unplug your computer at home, or if your home is susceptible to power outages), and also make it accessible to people who aren't comfortable letting MS turn on their computers automatically over the internet.

This would also be helpful for people who's phone is their sole computing device, as they'd be able to setup such a App-V instance directly through their MS account and not require a PC at all.

I imagine this could be offered for a few bucks a month per App-V instance, or be included in the Office 365 subscription.

4)
There are a ton of other things MS could do with a setup like thisackage the whole thing as a Windows Server feature so corporations could offer the same capabilities for their own software on their own networks for their private corporate user accounts.

• Allow users to contribute their computing resources to the App-V network, which MS would use to run other people's App-V instances (nothing would ever get installed on your machine), which would in turn allow you to access your own hosted App-V instances for an equal amount of time for free.
• etc

Not sure I agree with all of this, but some of it's not bad. I know what I'm wishing for, and while it might not be a perfect experience, it's not going to surprise me with how bad it is or anything. I don't expect a mobile chip to run games. I want something that can handle the simple stuff, like MusicBee, VLC, Office, and so on. It's the utility software I want, not the high-end things like PhotoShop. It's more an indication that I don't believe MS has any serious hope of developing a strong app market on phones right now. Maybe Centennial fixes that some.

1. What are you getting at here? What you have is Microsoft coming out and pulling the rug from maybe its best/only chance at a vastly improved library. I don't think many have been EXPECTING Win32 software to come, more that we've wished it would. I care less about the performance issues than the vulnerabilities opened up (allowing Win32 programs includes Win32 viruses). Overall, I don't get what the Continuum point is, either. What does the Band's presence here matter? That things not in a position to behave as a PC don't run like one isn't going to make a difference. Continuum is exactly why it could reasonably be planned.

2.This exists already. They have a remote app, though I've not set it up. What I've used is TeamViewer. Let me tell you, that thing will beat your battery down in a hurry. You're talking about a constant running of the screen, constant streaming of the computer, constant drain on the battery. You've now got the issue of Internet consumption to add in, as well as latency (I won't bother to address that TeamViewer won't stream audio, at least by default). It will require good, fast connections on both the PC and mobile end, and you'd better not be on cellular, because that will wreck the battery and run up data charges, potentially. It's a messy solution, speaking as someone who does it all the time.

3. I really don't want to think about YET ANOTHER way for us to get overcharged for something through a monthly service fee. The world is drowning in them enough as it is.

4. App-V better be 100% secure 100% of the time. Having people offer up their computers to let others in? Sounds like a great way to get the computer attacked.

 

[fdalbor]

re:

With the ARMY of programers Microsoft has it would seem they could do anything well with the OS. That is not the case. I have no idea if all this will be successful or not. I have moved on to Android. I will keep a 640 so i can check things out from time to time but that is the extent of my confidence in what they are trying. Its always coming soon with Microsoft.

 

[a5cent]

re:

Not sure I agree with all of this, but some of it's not bad.

It's a bit much to explain in a forum post. Think of it as a starting point from which to evolve your own ideas. Here are a few things you might want to consider:

I know what I'm wishing for, and while it might not be a perfect experience, it's not going to surprise me with how bad it is or anything. I don't expect a mobile chip to run games. I want something that can handle the simple stuff, like MusicBee, VLC, Office, and so on. It's the utility software I want, not the high-end things like PhotoShop.

I know your expectations would be realistic, but you're not the average consumer. Running Win32 desktop software locally would result in a situation where some desktop software would run tolerably well, while other software would be entirely intolerable, not the mention the software that would kill any phone's battery in under 30 minutes. While you'd in most situations be able to judge which software is suitable and which isn't, most people won't be able to do that, resulting in yet another MS solution that only works well/care-free for educated IT workers and enthusiasts. This isn't the type of solution we should be striving towards in a world where uncle Bob and his moose expect to successfully use computing devices.

I care less about the performance issues than the vulnerabilities opened up (allowing Win32 programs includes Win32 viruses).

Exactly, which is another reason why we should all be opposed to running Win32 desktop software on a phone. Windows on laptops/desktops is not considered "fun" by almost anyone, and bringing this experience over to the phone is definitely counter productive, unless we're literally trying to drive away uncle Bob and his moose.

1. What are you getting at here? What you have is Microsoft coming out and pulling the rug from maybe its best/only chance at a vastly improved library.

In terms of what software is available to you, there is no difference between having it run locally on your phone or accessing it remotely. In both situations the software is accessible from your phone, so in both situations the volume of available software is identical.

This exists already. They have a remote app, though I've not set it up. What I've used is TeamViewer. Let me tell you, that thing will beat your battery down in a hurry. You're talking about a constant running of the screen, constant streaming of the computer, constant drain on the battery. You've now got the issue of Internet consumption to add in, as well as latency (I won't bother to address that TeamViewer won't stream audio, at least by default). It will require good, fast connections on both the PC and mobile end, and you'd better not be on cellular, because that will wreck the battery and run up data charges, potentially. It's a messy solution, speaking as someone who does it all the time.

TeamViewer isn't comparable to what I'm suggesting here.

1)
TeamViewer, or any remote desktop solution is far too difficult for the average user to setup. They shouldn't have to setup anything. The idea is that you'd just sign into your Microsoft Account, tick the "allow remote desktop" checkbox, and then be able to project any software running on your PC, to any other large screen in the world, through your phone, without having to worry about your PC at home being on/off.

2)
Yes, TeamViewer is a battery hog. That's barely comparable to what MS could provide here though.

Furthermore, I think it's fair to assume that 95% of the time, people using Win32 desktop software on a phone would also have access to WiFi, as the experience is only viable if you also have access to a large screen + keyboard + mouse, i.e. there is some infrastructure in the vicinity. This type of setup would most often be used at hotels or at conferences, not in the middle of the desert. Assuming WiFi, running such software remotely rather than locally leads to far superior battery life.

Over cellular, yes, battery drain will be a pain in the rear, but running Win32 desktop software locally will be a pain in the rear either way. Doing so remotely at least gives you one way of having it not be a pain in the rear.

3)
MS can't buy your computing resources for you. You have to pay for those yourself. Either you do so by owning your own PC and having your phone access it remotely, or you pay someone to host your computing resources in the cloud. That's not overcharging. That's just fair. As long as you have a choice and can do either, I don't think there is a problem.

4. App-V better be 100% secure 100% of the time. Having people offer up their computers to let others in? Sounds like a great way to get the computer attacked.

Yes, it better be secure 100% of the time. Whether it is secure depends on how it works. I'm not sure if you're misunderstanding this, but nobody would be using your computer directly. The only entity with direct access to an isolated and non-persistent part of your PC would be MS, who you'd basically be renting computational resources to, in exchange for receiving the same, at no cost, at some later time (somewhat comparable to folding@home).

 

[jason10mm]

Re:

Actually, it might be the perfect time, since the phone market is slowing down because of lack of innovation. Phones now a days all have the same thing, better cameras, screens, and speed. Sure, that's great, but what else is there? What ground-breaking feature has anyone come up with?

No way. 18 months is just more time for the app market to totally divorce itself from anything MS can access. The phone is becoming more and more essential to daily life as a computer, not just a phone. Apps for banking, paying for parking, getting tickets, ordering food, etc, things that have little utility for a laptop/PC implementation (thus no universal windows version) for MS to shoehorn into their phone. Even webpage access to services may start to go away in favor of app based interfaces. In 18 months a phone that can't run those kinds of apps will be completely inconsequential and MS will never be able to gain traction.

By 2017 the Surface phone MUST run android, no question. I think MS is going to try to dominate Office type apps for android and probably iOS to leverage their evergreen programs over to the new ecosystem, maintaining their own mobile OS is a vanity project at best.

 

[Krystianpants]

Re:

Lol the Surface phones were supposed to Have Intel Atom processors, which are now cancelled.

According to who? No one knows but Microsoft what it's going to have. For all you know they could be working on a custom chip with Nvidia.

Your knowledge seems to have come from click-bait articles.

And it will not be called Surface Phone. Guarantee that. Though it will be a Surface name.

 

[Keith Wallace]

Re:

I know your expectations would be realistic, but you're not the average consumer.

I'd also say the average consumer doesn't want Win32 software on his phone...or a Windows-based phone, for that matter. Most people who want this have the half-brain necessary to not run around to notavirus.scam and get a phone hijacked, I think. As for general performance, we've seen laptops released with junky Celerons and Atom chips for years. Another year of Intel advancements could make that useful. The one concern I'd have is that those junk laptops have displays that are a MUCH lower resolution than the QHD displays in high-end phones. That might be unnecessary GPU strain that can't be overcome, meaning people might need to suffer some ppi degradation to get a smooth experience

Exactly, which is another reason why we should all be opposed to running Win32 desktop software on a phone. Windows on laptops/desktops is not considered "fun" by almost anyone, and bringing this experience over to the phone is definitely counter productive, unless we're literally trying to drive away uncle Bob and his moose.

I'm thinking more repackaged through Centennial, not something where we have the Windows desktop thrown on. I want the software, not the UI.

In terms of what software is available to you, there is no difference between having it run locally on your phone or accessing it remotely. In both situations the software is accessible from your phone, so in both situations the volume of available software is identical.

Minus latency and the view of the environment. TeamViewer on my phone is much less friendly than on a desktop. Think to how controlling the mouse and having something built for a landscape display outputs in portrait. I do it all the time on my phone, and it's not the best experience. It's a fundamentally flawed setup, because you either have the screen scaled to fit (and waste a lot of the height of the display), or you have to use it in landscape (which some might not want to). Ideally, you get Centennial apps repackaged and onto the W10M Store, but the alternative these is to support Win32 and have that phone-friendly app running.

TeamViewer, or any remote desktop solution is far too difficult for the average user to setup.

I disagree there, as it's basically just an install and an account login.

Yes, TeamViewer is a battery hog. That's barely comparable to what MS could provide here though.

I think saying what MS "could provide" without any proof of it is really difficult to support, so it's not really worth discussing until we see it in action.

MS can't buy your computing resources for you. You have to pay for those yourself. Either you do so by owning your own PC and having your phone access it remotely, or you pay someone to host your computing resources in the cloud. That's not overcharging. That's just fair. As long as you have a choice and can do either, I don't think there is a problem.

If they sell high-end phones, they can. As with big-ticket desktop parts, those who want the hardware have traditionally been willing to pay for it. That seems to go for phones as well, as we see people who don't NEED the 6"+ phone with 64+ GB of storage buy it anyway (my grandma is one of those people, by the way).

Yes, it better be secure 100% of the time. Whether it is secure depends on how it works. I'm not sure if you're misunderstanding this, but nobody would be using your computer directly. The only entity with direct access to an isolated and non-persistent part of your PC would be MS, who you'd basically be renting computational resources to, in exchange for receiving the same, at no cost, at some later time (somewhat comparable to folding@home).

The thought I have there is a compromised account. I always think of what the doomsday scenario is on that front. If it's done remotely, and someone gains access, that person can tell your computer to do whatever, and I don't trust the general public with keeping an account secure.

 

[phelme]

Re:

Lol the Surface phones were supposed to Have Intel Atom processors, which are now cancelled.

According to who? No one knows but Microsoft what it's going to have. For all you know they could be working on a custom chip with Nvidia.

This is what I've seen on it, from AnandTech. (but based on a Forbes article I think)

 

[Krystianpants]

Re:

This is what I've seen on it, from AnandTech. (but based on a Forbes article I think)

Alright and what does this have to do with how MS will design their next device? Microsoft is heavily partnered with Intel. They know about their plans before it even gets out in public. You believe MS is just sitting twiddling their thumbs waiting for Intel to design a chip for them? It's more likely that MS would work with Qualcomm on the snapdragon 830 to bring feature sets in than to just wait for intel. Furthermore intels roadmaps don't include any custom solutions they work with that requires non-disclosure. Nvidia is also pushing their way into mobile. No one knows a single thing. Just like no one anticipated the Surface book until it was released.