I don't see Continuum as game changer, what is the practical use of Continuum?

[rav4kar]

Re: I don't see "Continuum" as game changer

Who can change the volume on media player without pressing volume rockers ? Windows Phone user or Android user?

 

[Krystianpants]

I have a concern with your answer:


Continuum itself does not provide anything new. Some might argue that Continuum is actually holding people back! Remember WinMo5, with its desktop-esque interface? Think back to when the first iPhone was unveiled, with its capacitive touchscreen (hid) and its mobile optimized ui. We could argue for either device, however only one was designed with "the future" in mind. ~ WinMo for me any day

A Computer Science Philosopher could argue that Continuum prevents "the future". Even the definition of Continuum implies this XD
He/She would probably say that "the future" of computing requires an entirely different interface in which humans interact with computing devices.

Literally speaking, Continuum may be the future, however is it really the future of computing as we know it? We already have keyboards and mice, and we certainly have been accustomed to capacitive touchscreens. We have had laptops, netbooks, tablets, and hybrids.

This is all Continuum, but what does the future hold for us?

The difference is it's trying to get rid of everything else and just have your phone do everything. So it's cutting away the old technology. Now you introduce the new stuff. People are afraid of too much change, that's why changes happen slowly. I mean the rage Windows 8 got was insane. It was too big of a jump and It was also not a fully complete work. So really the future is likely an interface that you see all around you. Think Terminator. It's whoever brings the right interface, makes it practical and of course doesn't drastically affect your physiology. I mean wearing a set of glasses is not something I would be comfortable with. Even something like google glass just has this feeling of being attached to you. The phone is great because it is just stored away. The watch starts to get intrusive. So it has to be seamless. That's going to take some serious technology.

 

[Harrie-S]

With all the advantages for traveling light it also would be time that someone would invent self cleaning underwear.

 

[Tepid]

The cloud in of itself is not all encrypted. The sites you contact that have https in the url are using SSL true.
But, much of what you do online is not.

The second answer in this post is pretty good info on that...
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090924104921AA3zRbG

But know that, encryption can be broken. Certificates can be compromised.

Business is already changing the way it manages it's technology.
Many are moving to BYOD and VPN/VDI/Citrix connectivity.
Business Cloud Services are the way of the future.

So, once your Handheld Computer that happens to make phone calls becomes powerful enough (and that is not far off btw)
Laptops and Desktop will be a thing of the past, completely. Tablets and Handhelds will be the future.
Continuum is a HUGE step in that direction.

Problem is, Full data encryption for ALL line activity. This is where everything is lacking.
If you think that all the data you send out is encrypted, you are sadly mistaken.

Pop open a packet sniffer and watch it for a couple of hours and try to learn and understand what you are seeing
You will be surprised.

Back to Continuum, not only will it be good for business, it will change the way people access their data at home as well.

ChromeCast, FireTV, AppleTV, Roku, and now Continuum.

Yep, nothing to see here, move along.

 

[salazka]

Re: I don't see "Continuum" as game changer

/watch?v=-oi1B9fjVs4

Not a game changer? That remains to be seen.
It is a highly anticipated feature, and initially definitely not for the masses but they will jump all over it when they realize that they will be able to use a PC like device once they connect to a TV.

 

[Tepid]

Today people are mobile, and would not want to be tethered to the cloud like a bumper car in a bumper car ring XD

WTF does that even mean? Do you even know just how much that entire sentence makes absolutely not one iota of sense?


as for the other poster,,, "Sure, we have WiFi, but at work where speed and reliability are must-haves everyone uses Ethernet to plug in still,"
Not all companies have crappy WiFi. Sure, every cube has Ethernet connections, but I see many without Ethernet cables plugged in, even for a docking station. No, WiFi has a come a long way, and it's getting better. not everyone is tethered to CATx cables anymore.

 

[Tepid]

Everyone seems to be thinking about Continuum in the framework of what we have today and not thinking it through. It's not a product. It's not a feature of a product either. It is truly a game changer - in business. It's a new business model.

In the beginning we had PCs. Companies like Apple and IBM pioneered the mass-market PC business. Microsoft and a few others sold them their software. Few remember that the first thing that appeared on an Apple II screen when you switched it on was "Copyright Microsoft 1976". Eventually companies cloned the hardware - first the Japanese (Futijsu, NEC), then the Americans (Dell, Compaq, HP) and eventually even the Chinese (Legend/Lenovo). Microsoft still provided all - except Apple - with their software. The competition from these clones drove margins down to near and sometimes below zero, killing innovation. Nobody could afford to innovate. The industry stagnated. Even Microsoft.

Next came the Internet which was and still is a game changer. The Internet brought new business models like advertising support that were exploited by companies like Google. But for advertising to work they needed to drive higher volumes. And they needed to build barriers to entry for what are still effectively very slim business models. Microsoft and others saw an opportunity and expanded their own business by moving onto their territory (e.g. Bing) where they continue to nibble away at Google's market. Microsoft can do this thanks to the income they derive from their software cash-cows Office and Windows.

Google responded to this challenge by undermining the intrinsic value of Microsoft's software. They gave software away for "free". On the outside it appeared free but really what they were doing was driving advertising numbers up. Google's software is nowhere near as good as Microsoft's but it's "free" - a hard price to compete against.

Meanwhile Apple stuck to their guns and kept their walled-garden model alive. They owned their own hardware - most of which they just bought from Asian vendors - and they developed their own, so-so software. They kept their margins high and they're now the world's biggest company by market cap. They too tried to muscle in on Google's advertising-driven model to which Google responded with "free" Android, making it possible for companies like Samsung to build smartphones without the cost of software development and attack Apple's high-margin model. With some success.

Over the past year, Microsoft has changed. They've recognized that there are only a small number of real and sustainable companies in the technology space. Apple leads in hardware revenues, Google in advertising revenues and Microsoft in software revenues. But Apple doesn't really build their own hardware - they buy off-the-shelf components and design them into an "Apple" product.

Apple are now hampered by their lack of software ability. The iPhone hasn't changed much since it was introduced and the iPad is just an iPhone in a bigger box. Apple couldn't develop their own Cloud - they use Azure and Amazon for iCloud.

Google can't develop software. Everything they've shipped since they developed Search has been acquired. And most of it looks more like class project software than professional product software. They can't do hardware either, preferring to farm it out to ODMs.

Meanwhile Microsoft has woken up. They can do software. Azure, Cortana, Windows 10, Office and several others are all heading in the right direction. Microsoft bought Nokia and now they can do hardware. Their phones are excellent even though not (yet) mass accepted. Surface is top notch. HoloLens is the most innovative thing I've seen in years. Microsoft can also do new business models. Office 365 and Windows as a Service suggest this. Bing shows that they can keep Google from running away with the advertising market.

So how does Continuum play in this scenario? Simple. Continuum does to hardware what Google tried to do to software. It crushes its value. It moves the focus away from the device onto the task. The HoloLens guy said it perfectly - it's not the device that's mobile, it's you. So with Continuum Microsoft can move into controlling the three most important business models in the tech sector - hardware, which is being reduced in value, alternative business models in which they're growing and software where they're rapidly returning to a position of dominance.

As someone recently said, "when did Apple become the boring company"? So far this year they've introduced a digital watch. What has Google done recently? Nothing. The steady stream of new and innovative products, software and business models coming out of Microsoft this year have been impressive. And Continuum is an integral part of that. But it's not a product. It's a business model.

Very well said.

 

[fatclue_98]

That's what I don't get. Microsoft made a point to say you can still use your phone in continuim with new supported hardware. You can still receive calls and do your job on the keyboard and mouse.

You're simply thinking from a close minded perspective. Future monitors may not even have any cables but simply the phone will project onto it and you will touch a button on the monitor to allow the phone to do so. All a company needs is a keyboard/mouse and monitor sitting at a terminal. Tech/support/customer service reps are given a phone when they come and sign in to work. It can act as the phone they use for receiving calls as well as the computer they use. It can be moved anywhere. Easier for I.T. to support this sort of environment as the phone can be locked down. Profiles can easily be swapped to a different phone while checking for issues on one.

There are many solutions. You are thinking like dinosaurs. It's the old generation that is trying to hold technology back. I mean this forum is known for this kind of stuff. Complaining that their 512 meg phones don't support every game. Give me a break. You either adapt or get left behind.

And your worries about the cloud make no sense as it is an encrypted connection. That is the whole idea behind the cloud otherwise no one would use it.

Not all of us old farts resist change. But change just for change's sake is foolhardy. That's where age and wisdom come in.

Sent from my LG G3 via Tapatalk

 

[Krystianpants]

The cloud in of itself is not all encrypted. The sites you contact that have https in the url are using SSL true.
But, much of what you do online is not.

Any cloud server works through a client/server model where the application itself handles the encryption services on anything using that particular cloud service. In the case of onedrive, it's the onedrive app or anything using the API. No company would ever provide a cloud service without encryption. It doesn't use simple web level crypts either.

And yes everything can be compromised and because of that these companies use really hardcore encryption. Heck your phone could be compromised. Your bank could be. Anyways, no one is going to get around a strong encryption and then target only you. This would be a big thing all over the news.

 

[RayWP7]

Re: I don't see "Continuum" as game changer

You clearly don't know geeky WP people or read anything they post on these forums and article comments. Just the number of people that want play-to ability and stuff is surprising. I'm not sure if it is game-changing, but it could be a big thing to market against competing products as an additional feature and not the driving differentiator. To me, I see the value. Last minute device to use at a hotel or at a remote office you're visiting and need to demo/work on something and don't happen to have your laptop, or some other lame but oddly common problems.

 

[Nuno Moz]

Everyone seems to be thinking about Continuum in the framework of what we have today and not thinking it through. It's not a product. It's not a feature of a product either. It is truly a game changer - in business. It's a new business model.

In the beginning we had PCs. Companies like Apple and IBM pioneered the mass-market PC business. Microsoft and a few others sold them their software. Few remember that the first thing that appeared on an Apple II screen when you switched it on was "Copyright Microsoft 1976". Eventually companies cloned the hardware - first the Japanese (Futijsu, NEC), then the Americans (Dell, Compaq, HP) and eventually even the Chinese (Legend/Lenovo). Microsoft still provided all - except Apple - with their software. The competition from these clones drove margins down to near and sometimes below zero, killing innovation. Nobody could afford to innovate. The industry stagnated. Even Microsoft.

Next came the Internet which was and still is a game changer. The Internet brought new business models like advertising support that were exploited by companies like Google. But for advertising to work they needed to drive higher volumes. And they needed to build barriers to entry for what are still effectively very slim business models. Microsoft and others saw an opportunity and expanded their own business by moving onto their territory (e.g. Bing) where they continue to nibble away at Google's market. Microsoft can do this thanks to the income they derive from their software cash-cows Office and Windows.

Google responded to this challenge by undermining the intrinsic value of Microsoft's software. They gave software away for "free". On the outside it appeared free but really what they were doing was driving advertising numbers up. Google's software is nowhere near as good as Microsoft's but it's "free" - a hard price to compete against.

Meanwhile Apple stuck to their guns and kept their walled-garden model alive. They owned their own hardware - most of which they just bought from Asian vendors - and they developed their own, so-so software. They kept their margins high and they're now the world's biggest company by market cap. They too tried to muscle in on Google's advertising-driven model to which Google responded with "free" Android, making it possible for companies like Samsung to build smartphones without the cost of software development and attack Apple's high-margin model. With some success.

Over the past year, Microsoft has changed. They've recognized that there are only a small number of real and sustainable companies in the technology space. Apple leads in hardware revenues, Google in advertising revenues and Microsoft in software revenues. But Apple doesn't really build their own hardware - they buy off-the-shelf components and design them into an "Apple" product.

Apple are now hampered by their lack of software ability. The iPhone hasn't changed much since it was introduced and the iPad is just an iPhone in a bigger box. Apple couldn't develop their own Cloud - they use Azure and Amazon for iCloud.

Google can't develop software. Everything they've shipped since they developed Search has been acquired. And most of it looks more like class project software than professional product software. They can't do hardware either, preferring to farm it out to ODMs.

Meanwhile Microsoft has woken up. They can do software. Azure, Cortana, Windows 10, Office and several others are all heading in the right direction. Microsoft bought Nokia and now they can do hardware. Their phones are excellent even though not (yet) mass accepted. Surface is top notch. HoloLens is the most innovative thing I've seen in years. Microsoft can also do new business models. Office 365 and Windows as a Service suggest this. Bing shows that they can keep Google from running away with the advertising market.

So how does Continuum play in this scenario? Simple. Continuum does to hardware what Google tried to do to software. It crushes its value. It moves the focus away from the device onto the task. The HoloLens guy said it perfectly - it's not the device that's mobile, it's you. So with Continuum Microsoft can move into controlling the three most important business models in the tech sector - hardware, which is being reduced in value, alternative business models in which they're growing and software where they're rapidly returning to a position of dominance.

As someone recently said, "when did Apple become the boring company"? So far this year they've introduced a digital watch. What has Google done recently? Nothing. The steady stream of new and innovative products, software and business models coming out of Microsoft this year have been impressive. And Continuum is an integral part of that. But it's not a product. It's a business model.

How is hardware being reduced in value if the most profitable company in the World sells hardware? Or doesn't it sell hardware, but the combination of hardware and software?

This all thing of crushing devices into irrelevant things and what matter is software that is what MS has been doing for ages. The crux of it was Vista. If every single software bug or software inneficiency was a mosquito, Vista would be a nest!

When Apple actually shown the World that something could be much better then UMPC's, ultra expensive tablet PC, and 1000 dollars Symbian smartphones from Nokia made to look like PC it has blown everyone out of the water and exposed how undert-advanced was MS including the company itself. It took them years to catchup with iOS in all sorts of ways and they still not have catched up with the iPad with Windows 8.1 neither OSX in a lot of things.

I love Windows 10, I have a Surface Pro 3 and a Lumia 930 but let's get real. If devices were such an unimportant thing why does Surface Pro 3 with a Core i7 512SSD, 8GB of RAM costs close to 2000 dollars. Why does dock for Surface Pro 3 costs $200 dollars. Why dos type cover costs $150. Heck why did MS bought Nokia? Why did MS built the Surfave Pro 3? Why is the company building Hololens (its a device)? Why do we have an XBOX One, its a device?

I tell you why, Because they are important to the advancement of MS software. Period. Crushing the devices value? For whom?

EDIT: I've written on a previous posy how I think this can be disruptive but it os not in the way that it has been presented by Joe Belfiori.

On another note, stop calling the iPad a bigger smarphone. The iPad was the first device my two year old kid learned to play with. Instead of thiking how unprofessional it is for it, instead think of how effective it is compared to the MS vision had for UMPCs that no one wanted (over $1000 for one).

Wake up!

 

[PepperdotNet]

It took them years to catchup with iOS in all sorts of ways and they still not have catched up with the iPad with Windows 8.1 neither OSX in a lot of things.

Are you seriously suggesting that a non-scalable OS for a toy mobile device, which can run exactly one program, full screen, at a time, and only on specific hardware designed and built by the same company who wrote the OS, is somehow superior to one that can run many programs simultaneously on machines of all shapes and sizes from any manufacturer in the world? Really?

On another note, stop calling the iPad a bigger smarphone. The iPad was the first device my two year old kid learned to play with.

You're right, a smartphone can actually make phone calls. An iPad is, as your two year old demonstrated, a toy. Just because it's expensive and a lot of adults want one doesn't change the fact that it is a toy.

 

[Nuno Moz]

Are you seriously suggesting that a non-scalable OS for a toy mobile device, which can run exactly one program, full screen, at a time, and only on specific hardware designed and built by the same company who wrote the OS, is somehow superior to one that can run many programs simultaneously on machines of all shapes and sizes from any manufacturer in the world? Really? You're right, a smartphone can actually make phone calls. An iPad is, as your two year old demonstrated, a toy. Just because it's expensive and a lot of adults want one doesn't change the fact that it is a toy.

Are you seriously suggesting that a non-scalable OS for a toy mobile device, which can run exactly one program, full screen, at a time, and only on specific hardware designed and built by the same company who wrote the OS, is somehow superior to one that can run many programs simultaneously on machines of all shapes and sizes from any manufacturer in the world? Really? You're right, a smartphone can actually make phone calls. An iPad is, as your two year old demonstrated, a toy. Just because it's expensive and a lot of adults want one doesn't change the fact that it is a toy.

What are you talking about mate? Are you living a technical hole? iOS is multitasked 64bit OS. Windows Phone 8.1 is not even 64bits. So yes, they are playing catchup in technical terms in some areas. Windows 10 might turn technically the table since it consolidates the idea of a polymotphic UI taking advantage of the display abilities and sizes, but Windows 10 Mobile is not yet here and for the looks in the previews it looks late.

But that does not matter really. It will come out. Apple and Google visions don't answer many Things for the future, in fact its starting to show some weaknesses. But their strategy was never about squashing the price of sofware or whatsoever. They strategy is about solving computing problems for the consumer inline with the company revenue stream. Much like MS is.

This is the reality. Look my answer regarding if Mobile Continuum can disruptive or not was given a few pages back. Yes but not in the form shown IMHO. I believe that Windows 10 and Continuum can trully outshine the competition and solve many problems for the consumer if a missing tech goes is put forward into play really well (much like iPhone did with Toutch Screen and a Toutch OS). That is missin is Wireless Display that as thin as a Type Cover, retina level, toutch and pen enabled, optionaly with a keyboard like a Type Cover, and that can be paired with a Windows 10 Mobile device, a laptop, desktop and even XBOX One. That is true Continuum. Please have a look at my post on page 6.

There is an hardware and software problem to be solved that might make it truely disruptive. I think this kind of feature would be totally inline with MS revenue stream, would solve improve things in an order of magnitude that might be disruptive if the pricing is adquate. But not what Belfiori as shown. I have no particular reason to buy an Windows Phone for that specific feature.

For me, instead of MS loosing time showing of this kind of stuff, they should instead investing in brining this tech forword as fast as it can. Instead of focusing on brining the PC experience to the phone. Because once it does, is no longer about the PC experience but something much more powerfull IMHO,

 

[Kallisticker]

At least, Microsoft is doing something innovative with all the power of cpus, gpus and the desktop sized ram we carry around to do some snapchat.

 

[macgyver35]

In order to lend some context to my perspective, I'll say that I have worked in the IT field professionally for almost 10 years now, and I have and continue to support a fair number of technologies, and a group of users that ranges from highly technically proficient, to just above "cave man".

Firstly, in order to fully realize the potential impact of Continuum, we must stop looking at it by itself, and rather as a key link in a much largert ecosystem. yes, projecting you phone display onto a screen and using a mouse and keyboard may seem like a gimmick. However, couple that with OneDrive, where you have access to your documents, and will be able to create/edit/save, and then pick up later on a "full" computer, and you have a different scenario. There will likely be other technologies introduced that help flush out all the potential of Continuum. Ther very fact that there is the ability, and form developers' income standpoint, a need to develop universal apps, and I think it's a foregone conclusion that the benefits of Continuum will continue to expand.

Many have said it will most benefit teh Enterprise, but I'm inclined to think it is teh otherway around. Yes, there will be some business perks, but there are other considerations.

• Continuum on phones is suited to short-term "work time" use. This environments that require employees to pound away at a keyboard for 8+ hours a day will still prefer a more traditional (and most likely more easily secured) computing platform.
• There are a number of business software packages that do not work well at all using wireless connections. Many heavily database-dependent applications (Quickbooks, Sage, etc.) have frequent issues when trying to use them on anything but a healthy wired network connection.
• Many of us in IT have had to deal with the unfullfilled pipedream of BOYD in the workplace, and realize all too much how often that has either been a failed experiment, or one that is just not at all suited to various businesses for a variety of reasons, mostly pertaining to information security and company liability. Having employees' computers be so small that they could easily walk out the door with them is a problem.
• The fact that many phones are replaced in teh Enetrpise on a 2-year cycle is far more often than the norm of 5 to 8 years for traditional PCs. I don't know that many US businesses would be willing to outfit their full staff with smartphoens as their sole device becuase of the "subsidize" model of phone hardware purchases for US carries.
• The fact that US carriers often act as an impediment to updates, and thus features and fixes on phone, at least in US markets, also creates an issue. What happens when a nationwide company uses AT&T in Texas, but Verizon in California due to geographic coverage concerns, and finds that their carriers either release updates at different times, or just one does, or neither? A windows PC bypasses these headaches and allows IT full control and consistency of updates and feature roll-outs. When you are talking about employees having a phone as their primary computing tool, carriers are the big elephants in the boardroom.
• Mobile device management is still quite flawed and incomplete. And I can tell you that I and many people I know in the IT field list mobile device deployment and management as one of their biggest pains in the ****. I use Intune for our 37 corporate Windows Phones, and while it works, it is still lacking in many features that I would think nearly every IT person would want. Just the constant fear of employees downloading something stupid (and without your knowledge) and creating an information security issue, a virus/malware spread threat to the network, or just plain old massive data usage and overage charges makes me cringe. A Windows PC on the network is much easier to secure, I have no need to worry about how much data gets used, I can control what software can and can not be installed on each PC,a and by whom, and I have incredible granular control over all thousands of features and functions of the PC's through Group Policy. This simply isn't the case with a phone, Windows or otherwise, and I don't know too many guys like me that would be willing to give that up.

However, let's look at private citizens... I can say that roughly 20% of people I know now only have a smartphone as their sole computing device. Their phone's contracted signal is also their only way of accessing the internet at all. No home PCs or tablets, and they do just fine with that. But Continuum would make that experience much better for them. It would give yet one more reason for private citizens to upgrade their hardware regularly. It also creates the opportunity for Microsoft, who can now manufacture their own hardware, a way to make sure that their product gets better representation in phone carrier showrooms.

I have mentioned the upcoming Continuum feature of Windows Phones to many of my coworkers, and they all seem quite impressed by it. many who only have a smartphone and no computer expressed that they would most definitely want to upgrade to a Continuum-capable phone once they come out. Others, even if they have home PCs, have told may they would consider switching to Windows phone and away form their iPhone or Android device if Continuum lives up to the promise.

 

[chmun77]

Game changer or not, it doesn't affect me unless I change my current 1520 to newer flagships with the new chipsets. I think this feature is excellent for those who do business traveling much around and they can simply have their work or conferences done in the hotel with a portable folding bluetooth keyboard and mouse, on the TV. It will not be a useless feature for sure. But how much one leverage it, is up to individuals.

 

[Omar9399]

Game changer or not, it doesn't affect me unless I change my current 1520 to newer flagships with the new chipsets. I think this feature is excellent for those who do business traveling much around and they can simply have their work or conferences done in the hotel with a portable folding bluetooth keyboard and mouse, on the TV. It will not be a useless feature for sure. But how much one leverage it, is up to individuals.

As I said before it doesn't need continuum to do presentation on tv you can project your phone via Miracast.

 

[sweatshopking]

Yeah, this isn't that exciting, and all the actual hard work is being done by qualcomm, and android will have it immediately, if not before win 10 actually launches. Yawn, classic Microsoft

Also, we are 10 years at least from ubiquitous wireless displays. Don't buy your next phone hoping for widespread Miracast support. It isn't there.

 

[Roderick Aspiras]

We'll once Windows ships with Intel chips that are powerful enough with 4GB RAM and 128GB storage the possibilities are like very exciting! Imagine if you can ran Windows server OS in it.

 

[fatclue_98]

Re: I don't see "Continuum" as game changer

This thread is heading downhill faster than Alberto Tomba.

Sent from my LG G3 via Tapatalk