The Windows 10 April 2018 update has arrived! Get the new Dell XPS 15, starting at $999.99
03-18-2013 08:55 AM
52 123
tools
  1. aprilcy's Avatar
    Just want to point out the early days of the iPhone, the one that came out without 3G in 2007, there was no app store. No cut and paste. No SDK. No developers. It took a year to get an SDK and um nearly two years and two full OS revs to get cut and paste into iOS

    iOS Version History: A Visual Timeline | Visual.ly

    Let's not forget that just because you're behind doesn't mean you can code awesome faster.
    Creating a massive app store that no one had even done before is 10000x more difficult than fixing small holes that others already fixed. To be honest, if it was Ballmer not Jobs created the idea for cellphone app store, the idea would be forgotten in backyard now.

    And I agree with somebody in another post, "compare current to current". Fanboys can always find excuses but market don't.
    03-09-2013 09:29 PM
  2. a5cent's Avatar
    Their strategy is slow, slower and slowest. How is that a good strategy?
    You can't honestly believe, that WP management sits around, plotting how to be as slow as humanly possible, right? Do you think MS feels, that could they only be somewhat slower, then they would finally surpass Samsung and Apple in market share? Of course not! That is ridiculous! That is not their strategy.

    I think you are confusing "strategy" with "execution".

    MS has a three pronged strategy. One of them has led MS to unify their API's across smartphones, tablets and PCs as much as reasonably possible, which is still an ongoing effort. Understandably, most end users can neither imagine the work load involved in such an undertaking, nor can they appreciate the results. Ultimately, this is a feature that targets devs, not end users. However, just because end users aren't able to recognize progress, doesn't mean no progress is being made!

    Unifying API's across all three screens represents a critical step in realizing MS' long term strategic goals. I think this was the right move to make, which is why I say "the strategy is sound". I say so, despite MS having to sacrifice most of WP8's end user focused features.

    End users will be the focus of the updates currently coming down the pipeline... except possibly "blue", which sounds more developer focused every time I hear about it (speculation).
    rimlover likes this.
    03-09-2013 10:20 PM
  3. Man Kit Ching's Avatar
    They released a completely new kernel in an insanely quick period of time...
    I don't think they are slow at all in the big picture but many of you are speaking about tiny feature lists which they do take too long to implement.
    This maybe true if Microsoft didn't come out and said wp8 was already in work even before wp7 was released. I just think the people who whines here are mostly the one who really wants wp8 to do great in the market and wishes for its improvement can turn things around, but the slow development and situation like with Skype really are testing users patience...
    03-09-2013 11:22 PM
  4. a5cent's Avatar
    They released a completely new kernel in an insanely quick period of time...
    I don't think they are slow at all in the big picture but many of you are speaking about tiny feature lists which they do take too long to implement.
    This maybe true if Microsoft didn't come out and said wp8 was already in work even before wp7 was released
    Microsoft's Windows on ARM project existed long before WP7 was released. That is true. That project provided parts of the foundation for WP8 as well as W8RT. However, having the Windows kernel running on ARM is still a million miles away from having a working smartphone. Lipper2000's statement is true, despite the fact that Microsoft was working on parts of WP8 before WP7 was released.

    ...but I just can't get why those basic features' importance/resources needed are so low internally in MSFT.
    Those basic features aren't low on Microsoft's list. They are just prioritized lower than other work Microsoft had to do first! It has already been explained. I'll try to explain it in simpler terms:

    You need to lay a foundation (the OS) before you can build a house (the apps and features that are based on and shipped with the OS, like calendar, messenger, lock/volume/notification centre etc.).

    For WP8, Microsoft built an entirely new and expansive foundation. They then proceeded to build a WP8 house on top of it, which very closely resembled the previous WP7 house. Since you live inside the WP8 house (and never see the foundation), you notice little difference. Over time, Microsoft intends to extend your WP8 house and eventually replace it with a skyscraper, which the older foundation couldn't have supported.

    Unfortunately, laying that foundation was extremely labour intensive. Microsoft had to go into "crunch mode", just to get your WP8 house into an inhabitable state before you moved in. Ultimately, some parts were rushed, and it shows. Your new WP8 house doesn't offer much over your previous WP7 house. Some aspects are actually worse.

    You are now frustrated, because you wanted your house extensions sooner rather than later! However, that doesn't necessarily mean Microsoft did a terrible job. Microsoft's biggest task was laying that new foundation, but a concrete foundations curing process can only be accelerated up to a certain point. The same applies to software development, and operating systems in particular, because development teams aren't infinitely scalable. At some point, adding more manpower or throwing more money at the problem starts offering ever diminishing returns, to the point where it can become detrimental. I've seen more than one software development project, where the project manager's gut reaction to schedule overruns was to add more personnel, which often initiates a vicious cycle of more overruns and more personnel which almost always ends in project cancellation. Considering the complexity of operating systems, Microsoft really did do rather well.

    Unfortunately, doing well doesn't always translate into happy customers. Most people couldn't care less about how difficult it was to build their home's foundation. Peoples patience is wearing thin. On the bright side, Microsoft plans to deliver four updates in just over a year. I take that to mean, that Microsoft realizes they need to deliver a lot in short order.

    Microsoft handled WP8 as well as anyone else could have, or better. Microsoft's big mistake happened years ago, which was not having the Windows ARM kernel ready in time for WP7. Everyone's frustrations with WP8 are just a consequence of that single but huge fail.

    P.S. to anyone that is tempted to twist this construction analogy, as to suggest a different outcome for WP were possible: don't do it. It's a stupid tactic and just wastes time, as construction and software development are actually very different.
    Last edited by a5cent; 03-11-2013 at 11:32 AM. Reason: Spelling only
    akar33 and wpn00b like this.
    03-10-2013 01:53 AM
  5. d_abbatelli's Avatar
    Microsoft's Windows on ARM project existed long before WP7 was released...
    Your explanation totally makes sense from a "software developing" point of view, but does it if you look at it from a market perspective?
    Leaving the customers unhappy until you build solid foundations may just lead to customers migrating to other ecosystems, developing disaffection for your brand and thus not being willing to come back.

    MS has two tasks to accomplish at the same time: building a solid OS and ecosystem and convincing people it's the right ecosystem to use.
    So far, they may be doing great on the first task, if you see it on a longer perspective, but seems to me that they are doing very bad on the second point, looking at the market share. At this pace, when the "WP8 Skyscraper" will be ready, the market share will still be at 5% with the remaining 95% of folks (including those in developing countries) happily using their lag-free Android and their iPhone "cheap edition".

    Looking at MS as a whole company, I would ask myself how important is for them to be actively present in the phone ecosystem, and my answer is: enormously important, for a long list of reasons.
    Given that, my answer is that they have to invest more to keep the customers happy, even if this means throwing away money in features that will be obsolete in 9 months.
    03-10-2013 07:40 AM
  6. rockstarzzz's Avatar
    OMFreakingGlue!

    Guys, has it occurred to any of you talking about slow progress, that Microsoft has freaking put a whole Windows PC in your phone this time, for real?

    It's Windows running on ARM. That in itself is a major progress. If you are failing to see how this will be a long term win for Microsoft, you are just an ordinary consumer Microsoft doesn't really think will notice the difference. Their three screen vision is nicely set and just needs proper execution which will need time.

    Google or Apple, hasn't done this. Microsoft has not only used the same parts of kernel but also is opting and pushing for cloud solutions. Those two things in themselves have endless possibilities. The niche features or the common features that we are lacking right now, will eventually be addressed, it isn't the focus. By the time competitors achieve what Microsoft has achieved kernel wise and cloud solutions wise, Microsoft can afford to add and remove these features at least 5 times, because they've set the core of their three screens vision.

    Am I hallucinating?
    Dave Blake likes this.
    03-10-2013 07:52 AM
  7. ramrac's Avatar
    If u go back to the earlier days of iPhone, even iPhone4 on iOS4, u will see that it was a common thing - so if u volume down the music, or the game, u do the same to ur ringer...
    The iPhone 4 came out in June 2010. 3 years ago.

    Windows Phone came out the same year a few months later, and had that flaw, and many other small flaws that Microsoft just doesn't want to fix even though they have been standard on smartphones since before 2005.

    It is beyond ridiculous.
    rimlover likes this.
    03-10-2013 07:53 AM
  8. johninsj's Avatar
    i'm confused as to where you're going with the point.
    The point is Apple's execution isn't any faster than Microsoft's.
    03-10-2013 08:16 AM
  9. a5cent's Avatar
    Your explanation totally makes sense from a "software developing" point of view, but does it if you look at it from a market perspective?
    <snipped>
    Given that, my answer is that they have to invest more to keep the customers happy, even if this means throwing away money in features that will be obsolete in 9 months.
    I can't really answer your question, because I don't know much about their budgets. All I know is that they are already investing hundreds of millions every month, and that Google, Apple and Microsoft are all rather good at doing cost/benefit analysis... better than I am.

    I also know that developing anything significant, something that is actually able to change consumer perceptions, requires major investments... hundreds of millions. If that were my own money, I wouldn't be too enthusiastic about investing it into throw away software no one will remember in 9 months.

    Calling for MS to throw more money at a problem is simple. Very likely too simple. That is what I think.
    03-10-2013 09:21 AM
  10. a5cent's Avatar
    Am I hallucinating?
    Only if I am too, which isn't entirely unheard of mind you. ;-)
    03-10-2013 09:36 AM
  11. rimlover's Avatar
    Creating a massive app store that no one had even done before is 10000x more difficult than fixing small holes that others already fixed. To be honest, if it was Ballmer not Jobs created the idea for cellphone app store, the idea would be forgotten in backyard now.

    And I agree with somebody in another post, "compare current to current". Fanboys can always find excuses but market don't.
    that was me in this post haha. i'm glad you agree:). you're right if it was ballmer/gates that came out with the app store it would have failed.
    03-10-2013 11:31 AM
  12. d_abbatelli's Avatar
    I can't really answer your question, because I don't know much about their budgets. All I know is that they are already investing hundreds of millions every month, and that Google, Apple and Microsoft are all rather good at doing cost/benefit analysis... better than I am.

    I also know that developing anything significant, something that is actually able to change consumer perceptions, requires major investments... hundreds of millions. If that were my own money, I wouldn't be too enthusiastic about investing it into throw away software no one will remember in 9 months.

    Calling for MS to throw more money at a problem is simple. Very likely too simple. That is what I think.
    It sure is simple, and obviously what we're doing here is just playing the CEOs from our laptop screen trying to understand what is in company's mind...
    But now... Let's not think about things that may require some deep changes in the OS, like the separate volume may be...

    Think about stuff like the pdf reader, the issues with xbox music, the weekly view missing from the Calendar...
    Does it really take hundreds of millions to develop a calendar with a weekly view?
    If they improve the .pdf app now, will it need to be thrown away with Blue?
    From my personal "cost/benefit" analysis, looks to me that with very little investment, they could fix a whole lot of issues in a very short time...
    03-10-2013 11:32 AM
  13. rimlover's Avatar
    The point is Apple's execution isn't any faster than Microsoft's.
    are you kidding me? FaceTime, siri, unified email centre, retina display all were with ios4. in that time microsoft was using 800 by 480 that has to be a joke. apple is a lot quicker at the superficial level. as someone mentioned above, microsoft is focusing on using a unified API which took them a long time to do. i bet with windows phone 9 they're going to be able to fix the smaller bugs quicker because all 'under the hood' work is done across all their platforms.
    03-10-2013 11:40 AM
  14. Ridemyscooter86's Avatar
    The problem Microsoft has is they need to focus on the products that make the most money and have the biggest impact on their profits which sadly, WP is at the bottom of their list. MS has been very busy lately, they just launched a new PC OS (W8), a new office (2013), a new server system (2012), a new phone OS (WP8), and are gearing up for another new xbox launch this year, so it suck, but WP8 is not on the top of their priority list. The biggest overall strategy it looks like they are doing at the moment is unifying their code base which is extrememyl important and will do more for WP8 than anything. That is why windows phone 8 runs NT as its kernel, as does W8, as does server 2012, as does RT... The main issue WP8 has, and if you read any objections to it and all the reviews its APPS, APPS, APPS!!!! this is why unifying their code base is extremely important as a windows 8 metro app works on RT, WP8, server 2012, presumably the next xbox, etc... Once windows 8 grows, windows phone 8 will grow more as well.

    As other people have stated, windows phone just doesn't get the cash flow because it just doesn't make as much money unfortunately. Hopefully time and their other products growing will change that.
    03-10-2013 07:03 PM
  15. a5cent's Avatar
    From my personal "cost/benefit" analysis, looks to me that with very little investment, they could fix a whole lot of issues in a very short time...
    Taken in isolation, some of the smaller issues do look like they might be cheaply and quickly fixed. Any single issue isn't likely to cost that much (relatively speaking, because we are still easily talking about $ 100'000 per fix, even for apparently simple features). Yet I still disagree. Unfortunately, I don't think I am able to explain myself briefly, but I'm also not going to hold a course on software engineering and project management. I'll just give you a few pointers and hope you can make sense of it:

    Firstly, you must realize that every project has a budget, a scope, and a deadline. It's a fact of life that corporate realities don't allow you to optimize each of those properties. Often times, you are lucky if you can settle on two of them and adjust the third towards more realistic expectations. Which of those do you think Microsoft can manage most flexibly? Hint: it's not budget/personnel, and at least for WP8's first development cycle, it also wasn't the deadline.

    Furthermore, software projects of this size and complexity are like ships. They can't turn on a dime. Future movements are meticulously planned and scheduled long in advance, particularly when it comes to personnel. Add a few people and you'll noticeably lower the entire teams productivity for quite a few weeks, because new team members require support to get up to speed. After new team members are integrated, you typically prefer to retain them, as you've otherwise wasted large upfront investments in evaluation, training and integration. Simultaneously, you can't retain massive teams that are dimensioned to handle the largest workloads that occur during project peaks. That is simply too inefficient during normal stretches. You need to find a balance between overstaffing during normal development phases and understaffing during project peaks. Once you have that, it is best that changes occur slow and steady, as not to disrupt the team too much at any one time. Finally, some things in software development aren't easily accelerated, even if you were to increase team sizes early on, particularly in OS development. In summary, you need to find a balance in regard to the development teams size, you can't make knee-jerk adjustments without endangering the entire project, and some things can't be rushed, no matter how many people you assign to the task. Now consider that the project peak for WP8's first development cycle will have occurred towards the end of the cycle, starting around the time the OS had been stabilized enough as to allow for efficient porting, coding and testing of OS apps (messenger, calendar, etc). This comparatively brief time span, between OS stabilization and project deadline, is exactly the phase during which most of the features you and others are calling for would have come into existence. It's easy to say: "throw more money at it". For all the reasons I've hinted at here, it's far more difficult to make changes during such project peaks that do more good than harm. I doubt that anyone who hasn't experienced this themselves can really comprehend the complexity of what I'm briefly summarizing here, but it might be enough to make people understand that the project environment is anything but simple.

    We all have the luxury of being able to criticize MS without needing to confront any of the realities of software development. I simply doubt anyone here has better judgement on that topic than those who actually do that job. I can imagine situations where the "throw more money at the problem" approach may have some merit. I'm sure no such situation existed during this first phase of WP8's development. You simply can't build on an OS that isn't solid, you can't rush an OS into stability, and massively ramping up team size after having stabilized the OS also isn't an option with the deadline looming so close.

    What I think does deserve questioning, is whether that which Microsoft did achieve was prioritized correctly. Personally, I'm not happy with "kids corner". I could be mistaken, but I can't imagine this feature netting WP a lot of sales. I think that a notification centre should have come first. I think "datasense" was another huge mistake. It should either have been available to everyone, or not done at all. WP just isn't at a point where Microsoft can afford to invest resources towards features only a minority of users can enjoy. I suspect we could have gotten custom sounds, separate volume controls and maybe even some extra IE10 features instead.
    Last edited by a5cent; 03-10-2013 at 09:00 PM. Reason: Spelling only
    rimlover, akar33 and d_abbatelli like this.
    03-10-2013 08:37 PM
  16. jdhooghe's Avatar
    If I am wrong or expecting too much, let me know: Assuming that Microsoft has its own department of dedicated staff for WP8 and considering that they know how the OS works as they designed it. What is taking so long? It shouldn't be a problem as developers are forced to adhere to very strict APIs from my understanding so that all apps have the same structure. All follow the same execution. If they all use the same sound API, create another sound profile for the phone app that no app has access to. You don't break anything. You all keep saying that the foundation has been built yet knowing how to build a house is not totally unknown now. You have the required building blocks now which you have designed and understand, you know how they interact with one another since you've built it from the ground up and you know what is needed to make a house functional.

    I really, really hope that there aren't 100 software engineers who all divvy up their time on W8, WRT and WP8 instead of dedicated TEAMS that work strictly on their own area. If that is the case then that is a HUGE problem.
    03-10-2013 08:41 PM
  17. a5cent's Avatar
    ^ I don't understand your question, but I can say that MS has dedicated teams for each product, although W8RT and W8 are actually the same product and hence engineered by the same team.
    03-10-2013 09:26 PM
  18. akar33's Avatar
    Actually Apple has done this. iOS is based on MacOSX which in turn is based on Unix. As a5cent previously noted, Microsoft's single most biggest flaw was not having the windows on arm ready when wp7 launched. We wouldn't have faced a second platform reset with WP8 and they would concentrate more on building end user features. Porting the entire windows kernel to a friggin phone is no small feat and that obviously sucked all developer effort. I think a5cent's analogy makes perfect sense. The problem is just that a lot of people are overlooking the WP platform in favor of iOS or android.
    03-10-2013 10:24 PM
  19. d_abbatelli's Avatar
    Taken in isolation, some of the smaller issues do look like they might be cheaply and quickly fixed.
    cut
    What I think does deserve questioning, is whether that which Microsoft did achieve was prioritized correctly. Personally, I'm not happy with "kids corner". I could be mistaken, but I can't imagine this feature netting WP a lot of sales. I think that a notification centre should have come first. I think "datasense" was another huge mistake. It should either have been available to everyone, or not done at all. WP just isn't at a point where Microsoft can afford to invest resources towards features only a minority of users can enjoy. I suspect we could have gotten custom sounds, separate volume controls and maybe even some extra IE10 features instead.
    You are probably right. I don't work in software development, but I can imagine a whole lot of the issues you are talking about.
    But still, I look at what Nokia is doing with WP and I compare with MS: the first was (and still is) a company leaning towards bankruptcy, the second one is a revenue machine... Yet, Nokia ported its navigation software from Symbian to WP in few months, and has been regularly updating it since then, and along with it's developing a whole lot of really well crafted apps, while Microsoft struggles to give us a calendar with a weekly view.

    What you say about "prioritizing" is also very wise... What comes to my mind about this is "did they really need to replace Zune with two syncing software that basically are a beta version? Couldn't they wait the next release for that without depriving us of a endless number of features?".

    Anyway, again, your picture totally makes sense, and I can see the same "pattern" in a lot of other MS products: outlook.com still has the old Hotmail calendar (even if they would have a perfect metro-style calendar working in office365 and ready to be ported). Office Outlook 2013 has a whole lot of bugs (I can't sync my default calendar with outlook.com, can't send emails as alias and lot of other issues). Actually, also the Metro Apps developed directly by MS in Windows 8 are all very basic and miss a lot of features.
    Probably, is just that MS efforts to get the "three screens" is sucking all the energy away from the user level software. I just hope that they'll get it fast, so they can start working on these issues full time.
    03-11-2013 04:33 AM
  20. aprilcy's Avatar
    You are probably right. I don't work in software development, but I can imagine a whole lot of the issues you are talking about.
    But still, I look at what Nokia is doing with WP and I compare with MS: the first was (and still is) a company leaning towards bankruptcy, the second one is a revenue machine... Yet, Nokia ported its navigation software from Symbian to WP in few months, and has been regularly updating it since then, and along with it's developing a whole lot of really well crafted apps, while Microsoft struggles to give us a calendar with a weekly view.

    What you say about "prioritizing" is also very wise... What comes to my mind about this is "did they really need to replace Zune with two syncing software that basically are a beta version? Couldn't they wait the next release for that without depriving us of a endless number of features?".

    Anyway, again, your picture totally makes sense, and I can see the same "pattern" in a lot of other MS products: outlook.com still has the old Hotmail calendar (even if they would have a perfect metro-style calendar working in office365 and ready to be ported). Office Outlook 2013 has a whole lot of bugs (I can't sync my default calendar with outlook.com, can't send emails as alias and lot of other issues). Actually, also the Metro Apps developed directly by MS in Windows 8 are all very basic and miss a lot of features.
    Probably, is just that MS efforts to get the "three screens" is sucking all the energy away from the user level software. I just hope that they'll get it fast, so they can start working on these issues full time.
    I like your argument and the example of the calendar app. I think Msft should hire a few more market oriented people rather than pure tech product manager to balance a product team. Customer needs/satisfactions are same important as the tech advantages (which sometimes could be advanced in theory but useless in practice).
    rimlover likes this.
    03-11-2013 11:47 PM
  21. Nabkawe5's Avatar
    Big programming companies don't operate like an app developer , they can't majorly change anything really fast because it'll effect so many things in the developing chain , for example , MS can't say i'll add ringer controls this seconds , because it has manuals,tutroials for developers/ then translated and localized manuals , APIs that need to be reconsidered in almost all apps. it'll basically ruin the OS to due so .
    What they do is figure out ways to inject new features with the least amount of damage to previous apps , and most likely create a compatibility mode just to let old apps cope with the change, Think of how many updates Apps in Android get , its not always for nothing.

    We hope MS can be a little faster doing that , but other than that from a technical point of view , we can't blame them.
    03-11-2013 11:56 PM
  22. a5cent's Avatar
    I think Msft should hire a few more market oriented people rather than pure tech product manager to balance a product team. Customer needs/satisfactions are same important as the tech advantages (which sometimes could be advanced in theory but useless in practice).
    You haven't understood a thing I've written. I'll try one more time. Software is often structured in layers. In the case of WP, the lowest layer is closest to the hardware, whereas the topmost layer represents the OS apps (calendar, messenger, etc.). There may be any number of layers in between.

    To reuse my previous analogy, if WP were a house, imagine the top layer being the roof (user facing features and UI), and the bottom layer being the foundation (kernel). Yes, there are many layers/floors in between, but we'll ignore that. Now imagine you get commissioned to build that house. What do you start with? The foundation or the roof? Wanting to start with the roof obviously sounds quite ridiculous, but that is exactly what you are calling for in software terms.

    If you've completed the house, then you are free to remodel any of the floors you like. You can even freely prioritize roof improvements over everything else if so desired. However, if you are building a brand new house, which is exactly what Microsoft did during this last WP8 development cycle, then you don't have that luxury. You can't just willy nilly dabble a little on the "consumer side" (the roof) and then dabble a little on the "tech side" (the foundation). The foundation (and all the floors in between), must be completed first.

    The problem was simply that Microsoft needed to build a new house with a solid foundation, while most people wanted nothing but a reroofing. The problem has nothing to do with Microsoft having too few "market oriented people" like you suggest.

    But still, I look at what Nokia is doing with WP and I compare with MS: the first was (and still is) a company leaning towards bankruptcy, the second one is a revenue machine... Yet, Nokia ported its navigation software from Symbian to WP in few months, and has been regularly updating it since then, and along with it's developing a whole lot of really well crafted apps, while Microsoft struggles to give us a calendar with a weekly view.
    And do you remember how Nokia fared with Symbian? Do you remember that the main reason Nokia gave up on Symbian, was that they couldn't evolve it fast enough, despite having assigned roughly 6000 people to Symbian R&D?

    Microsoft is now doing a majority of that really difficult software engineering work, which Nokia previously did themselves. This effort on Microsoft's part is what allows Nokia to do all those things you mentioned in a timely fashion!

    Both companies want to make their customers happy, but Nokia has the freedom to devote almost all of their software engineering staff directly towards that goal. Microsoft is in a much more difficult situation, because they must worry about app compatibility (WP7 vs. WP8), security models, unified API's across W8, RT and WP, and literally hundreds of other things most users have no idea even exist. In this last iteration, Microsoft was simply forced to care primarily about those things which consumers don't. Unfortunately, there weren't any engineering resources left over (of around 500) to work on much else.
    Nabkawe5 and akar33 like this.
    03-12-2013 02:16 AM
  23. conanheath's Avatar
    So basically, wp8 isn't finished. MS put out an unfinished product which is a mess and we have to suffer. I understood loud and clear. MS is writing checks their *** can't cash and Nokia is taking it on the chin.
    03-15-2013 09:20 AM
  24. Alex Rodriguez Jr.'s Avatar
    So basically, wp8 isn't finished. MS put out an unfinished product which is a mess and we have to suffer. I understood loud and clear. MS is writing checks their *** can't cash and Nokia is taking it on the chin.
    I guess Samsung and Android have been pushing out unfinished devices for years, as the S4 just got features Nokia and Windows Phone have had for months, even years...
    03-16-2013 01:17 PM
  25. a5cent's Avatar
    So basically, wp8 isn't finished. MS put out an unfinished product which is a mess and we have to suffer. I understood loud and clear. MS is writing checks their *** can't cash and Nokia is taking it on the chin.
    Suffering due to WP8? I know a few war vets who would think you crazy. Other than that, yes, I absolutely agree that WP8 wasn't ready, but I also understand that MS' hand was being forced by market pressures. They really had no choice but to slap a version number on whatever they had ready and ship it.
    03-17-2013 04:48 PM
52 123

Similar Threads

  1. Is it possible to play FLAC files on wp8?
    By snaqvi91 in forum Windows Phone 8
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-21-2014, 08:51 PM
  2. Is it possible to remove the cover on the 8x?
    By lee.eubanks in forum HTC 8X
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-31-2013, 07:30 AM
  3. Is it weird that I'm turned on by computer parts?
    By jalb in forum The "Off Topic" Lounge
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 02-02-2012, 05:32 AM
  4. Is it possible to flash an Android rom on a WP7?
    By yunchikan in forum Software Development and Hacking
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-11-2012, 06:21 PM
  5. Is it possible to watch Engadget videos at all?
    By Blacklac in forum Windows Phone 7
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-04-2011, 10:12 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD