vlad0
New member
As far as Elop's plan.. all I can see at this point is that without Nokia, WP's market share will be around 1% .. and I am not sure how Microsoft would have made the other OEMs concentrate on WP enough to bring that up in the same time Nokia is doing so right now.
HTC and Samsung are both concentrated on android, Sony and LG are not interested, and then imagine Nokia doing their own thing at the same time.. it might have been andro (I wouldn't even touch their phones if that was the case), or whatever, but they will be a strong competitor against WP... after all, they were the ones who kept Windows Mobile at bay in late 90s early 00s, and they spent billions doing it..
Here is a good article about it: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/02/11/nokia_microsoft_history/
One of the major reasons for buying Symbian was to keep Microsoft and their OEMs away... but then Apple and Google came along and they were caught off guard. The Symbian project did work tho, its was a huge commercial success (which I doubt WP can replicate), and it managed to keep Microsoft's market share very low.
Its all a bit ironic.. isn't it..
Nokia tried the moving lens approach with the N93/N93i a long, long time ago and decided that this is not the way.
As far as the software required to support the system, yes.. Symbian would be easier due to its modular nature, and it being an real-time OS, but that doesn't mean that they can't change the way the system work (get rid of the extra DSP?) and make it work on Windows NT. I am sure that there are ways to do it.. its obviously not easy since its been couple of years now.. but I am sure that they will get it out.
They are lucky because that system is so far ahead of its time, that they can afford to be slow and still be ahead when they finally get it to WP..
HTC and Samsung are both concentrated on android, Sony and LG are not interested, and then imagine Nokia doing their own thing at the same time.. it might have been andro (I wouldn't even touch their phones if that was the case), or whatever, but they will be a strong competitor against WP... after all, they were the ones who kept Windows Mobile at bay in late 90s early 00s, and they spent billions doing it..
Here is a good article about it: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/02/11/nokia_microsoft_history/
One of the major reasons for buying Symbian was to keep Microsoft and their OEMs away... but then Apple and Google came along and they were caught off guard. The Symbian project did work tho, its was a huge commercial success (which I doubt WP can replicate), and it managed to keep Microsoft's market share very low.
Its all a bit ironic.. isn't it..
The whole point of the Phase 1 system is to get rid of the need for movable optics, they are not ideal for mobile phones. They take too much room, leaving less space for a bigger sensor, they are heavy, they break.. phones are supposed to be durable.Umm EOS most probably will not be a phone at all(for reasons mentioned here : Why Nokia 808 had to use Symbian... ) still should rock digital camera world if it's true that it will have 41 MP sensor combined with moving optics(=real zoom). But market for such devices is not huge, Galaxy Camera and Nikon S800c are not doing well.
Nokia tried the moving lens approach with the N93/N93i a long, long time ago and decided that this is not the way.
As far as the software required to support the system, yes.. Symbian would be easier due to its modular nature, and it being an real-time OS, but that doesn't mean that they can't change the way the system work (get rid of the extra DSP?) and make it work on Windows NT. I am sure that there are ways to do it.. its obviously not easy since its been couple of years now.. but I am sure that they will get it out.
They are lucky because that system is so far ahead of its time, that they can afford to be slow and still be ahead when they finally get it to WP..
Last edited: