Microsoft Reportedly Testing New Phone With New Windows Mobile OS

[Avi Kcholi]

If once upon a time MS strength was backwards compatibility, today they are going all over the place. Erratic behaviour such as this does not inspire confidence and rather tells the customer base that you better go with a stable platform. I am not against advancement, not at all, but after forcing Silverlight down our throats and developers investing in it, if they render it useless on the new platform means that what little apps there are on the Windows mobile scene will dwindle down to nothing. Why would I as a consumer even consider it?

 

[Avi Kcholi]

The OS is the least of the worries compared to the App issue.

Absolutely agree with you on OS stability issues. They are all mediocre to say the least. The main issue is lack of useful apps. Nobody these days develops for W10M. Apps are developed only for Android and iOS.

 

[nate0]

If once upon a time MS strength was backwards compatibility, today they are going all over the place. Erratic behaviour such as this does not inspire confidence and rather tells the customer base that you better go with a stable platform. I am not against advancement, not at all, but after forcing Silverlight down our throats and developers investing in it, if they render it useless on the new platform means that what little apps there are on the Windows mobile scene will dwindle down to nothing. Why would I as a consumer even consider it?

You have a valid point. Seems though Microsoft is preparing for something. I just do not see where the flood gates will open up here for all these apps to just appear or pour in. I mean if they can emulate x86 on ARM, they sure as heck can emulate Android apks. Actually it would be easier and maybe more ethical to just do that out of the gate.

 

[Avi Kcholi]

Seems though Microsoft is preparing for something.

I guess they are preparing for recursive reboots Haha

 

[nate0]

I guess they are preparing for recursive reboots Haha

hehe. I wonder what would that look like?

 

[nate0]

A lot of it does not make sense. When we stare at it and try to see this picture they are painting. Jason Ward explained it very well in one of his Articles defining Microsoft's internal perspective like one of Artists sculpting the monuments on Mt. Rushmore. I thought that was a cool way to put it.

But from our angle, we do not have the luxury of even the map of what is laid out. So we are caught waiting or following along sometimes. I still love the W10M OS. Be nice if they relax on it a bit and just refine/mold/sculpt the tar out of W10M. I seriously hope Microsoft makes it to their goal, whatever it is with all this innovation on the platform side, like anyone else it can tend to make me wonder some times...

 

[dov1978]

I don't think any of us here that have been through at least 2 or 3 reboots already are excited about another attempt but I'm a sucker for punishment and I'll hang around and give them a chance...again. They really need to sort the apps this time around though. It's key in my opinion. I don't care how they market it and if it is going to be aimed primarily at Enterprise then it still needs apps. I'm not a businessman or power user but I know they need apps outside work too for things like fitness, social media, media consumption and photography. They're still normal people outside of work and I'm sure they don't want to be carrying a separate phone for those apps like many of us have been forced to do just now to fill the gaps. These apps need to look and function well too and not like how they did in the past where we had some of the big names but the apps looked awful and had far less functionality than their counterparts on iOS or Android. Yes give them a Windows look but keep them mostly on par. We also need Google on board as there's just too many people that do want their apps vs those who don't. They should be there as a choice. Windows just now is the odd one out, Android has Google apps (obviously), Apple apps and Microsoft Apps. iPhone has Apple apps (obviously), Google Apps and Microsoft apps. And Windows just has Microsoft apps. All 3 have third party apps too of course but Windows has an ever shrinking selection of those too and replacing them with Web link tiles just isn't the way forward!

I still want them to get this right and get in the game just like I did when I first got on board with my Lumia 800 on WP7 and told everyone I knew "watch this space, Windows Phone will be the biggest phone OS in a years time. It's Microsoft, if anyone can do it they can".

 

[Drael646464]

Well yes, in SE Asia Nokia was big, they had their support centres in every corner of the city, priority showrooms etc. MS inherited them but never converted / expanded them to include other MS products, I think Nadella always wanted to lose the Nokia baggage right from start, so he let them go.

They only leased the brand, so they didn't actually own the nokia brand, or the channels.

 

[Drael646464]

You have a valid point. Seems though Microsoft is preparing for something. I just do not see where the flood gates will open up here for all these apps to just appear or pour in. I mean if they can emulate x86 on ARM, they sure as heck can emulate Android apks. Actually it would be easier and maybe more ethical to just do that out of the gate.

And abandon the UWP platform? Developers would never take MS seriously again. That could almost doom the whole OS platform.

Yes MS can easily emulate 4.3 android (not beyond), but a) that's going out of use and b) using another software OS app platform is death to your own. UWP needs an all in attitude from MS, a bullish, car game of 'chicken', yes we are goddamn doing this attitude, that will encourage even game devs and steam users to switch in the end. Anything less could literally be the move that killed windows.

They key is that full UWP cannot depend on win10m alone. It must be supported by windows on arm on tablets and laptops as well as windows s, and new catergory definging devices, more mixed reality and so on. It needs a chorus of hardware platforms repleat with users.

Then no on can ignore it anymore.

 

[TennisGuy45]

If once upon a time MS strength was backwards compatibility, today they are going all over the place. Erratic behaviour such as this does not inspire confidence and rather tells the customer base that you better go with a stable platform. I am not against advancement, not at all, but after forcing Silverlight down our throats and developers investing in it, if they render it useless on the new platform means that what little apps there are on the Windows mobile scene will dwindle down to nothing. Why would I as a consumer even consider it?

I don't think you understand what Silverlight is and what it is/was meant for.

You also don't seem to understand what everything Microsoft has done in app development since then is either.

Here is a very very short synopsis, and will help explain why Silverlight is going to be retired.
Silverlight created as a interactive web plugin, almost a competitor to Adobe Flash.
Sliverlight introduces XAML and new way of building UI, absolutely changes the way .Net developers can build quick, fluid, responsive UI.
Microsoft takes Sliverlights XAML UI design and adapts it to WPF for windows applications.
Microsoft enters mobile market wants to build flexible way of creating apps, uses Silverlight as a way.
Microsoft creates universal apps, ability to create apps without need of Silverlight (remember this tech was designed as a web plugin).
Microsoft creates UWP and wants to retire Silverlight.
Why you say? Well UWP is idea to run apps on any Windows core. Silverlight is built around dependencies on web and old libraries no longer used.
Since Silverlight introduced XAML and every UI tech since then has built off XAML it is not too difficult or resource intensive to make these legacy Silverlight apps into UWP.
Getting rid of old legacy API's and apps allows Microsoft to remove bloat, overhead, and move to a cleaner-faster-more integrated future.

 

[tgp]

Then no on can ignore it anymore.

You're new here aren't you? ;-) While you may be correct, we've been saying this for the last several years, every time Microsoft has come up with some scheme to encourage app development.

 

[brau0303]

I am always interested to see what experiments may produce in the Mobility space..

Cheers,
BR

 

[Drael646464]

You're new here aren't you? ;-) While you may be correct, we've been saying this for the last several years, every time Microsoft has come up with some scheme to encourage app development.

UWP is two years old, I'm 39, so relative to me UWP is new. I'm not new to how slow people are to adapt no. 16 bit. win 3.1. windows nt/xp. UWP is a bigger shift. It's a bigger project to get people to adapt. In two years this ain't bad.

People will believe what they like but uwp its not about 8.1 or windows phone 7, its not about Silverlight, and its not even about mobile period. It's about windows period, same way all those former, small shifts were.

People who think this is about 'apps' have it all wrong imo. UWP isn't 'apps', its the proposed next step for the entire Microsoft software ecosystem, as win32 was, as windows 3.1 was, as xp was, but even more so.

Windows will thrive or fail, as a whole, on uwp. If it fails it might be time to go Linux, or buy a mac, or get used to chromeos.

It requires not just dev adoption, but user adoption. In a timespan of two years though I think MSFT has done very well with this mammoth task. Perhaps in five we can call win32 legacy and mean it.

 

[nate0]

UWP is two years old, I'm 39, so relative to me UWP is new. I'm not new to how slow people are to adapt no. 16 bit. win 3.1. windows nt/xp. UWP is a bigger shift. It's a bigger project to get people to adapt. In two years this ain't bad.

People will believe what they like but uwp its not about 8.1 or windows phone 7, its not about Silverlight, and its not even about mobile period. It's about windows period, same way all those former, small shifts were.

People who think this is about 'apps' have it all wrong imo. UWP isn't 'apps', its the proposed next step for the entire Microsoft software ecosystem, as win32 was, as windows 3.1 was, as xp was, but even more so.

Windows will thrive or fail, as a whole, on uwp. If it fails it might be time to go Linux, or buy a mac, or get used to chromeos.

It requires not just dev adoption, but user adoption. In a timespan of two years though I think MSFT has done very well with this mammoth task. Perhaps in five we can call win32 legacy and mean it.

You have a point. Microsoft did not just reboot W10M, they are basically rebooting Windows entirely since W10 was released. To move everything forward as huge an operation as it is, it will take time. Now 2 years in already about...it will take time.

We focus on W10M so much because the world is so into mobile and handhelds now that it is crazy.

 

[RayWP7]

I think Microsoft should do what they think is best. If focusing on gaming, Surface, and VR/AR are their priorities, thats fine. If they do come into the mobile space, remember they stuck with Windows phone/mobile pretty much until the 950. Then they declared enterprise focus and the next round of "re-entrenchment" occurred. Whatever they do, if they do decide to make another push - they should be ready and not have to require many (more) iterations of OS. Going from 7 to 10 was pretty painful if you're not a tech/ Windows fan. It seems like they are getting to the point of platform stability in terms of what is needed for mobile. CShell sounds pretty promising. Finally, they should have inked commitments from at least the top 50 mobile app vendors to have their presence "legitimized." Windows desktop app gap on mobile form factor is something people have dealt with for decades, it won't be disruptive. They need to just focus on their "WinOS anywhere" mantra and ensure that popular experiences on other platforms have representation and are of at least equal quality. Its a tall order, but they either want to make headway and make people notice them, or they don't. It can't be just enthusiasts like us. Surface has done a lot to rehabilitate their late 90s image. They should capitalize on their new image.

 

[a5cent]

UWP is two years old, I'm 39, so relative to me UWP is new.

You have a point. Microsoft did not just reboot W10M, they are basically rebooting Windows entirely since W10 was released.

Actually, it's not that new.

Despite WCentral's myriad attempts at muddying the waters around the term UWP, it's still (and always has been) an API and a runtime environment. UWP directly evolved out of WinRT, which first shipped with Windows RT back in 2012. MS had been working on WinRT already for many years prior to that. That is to say this transition is in no way a recent development. It reaches back far longer than two years. It started long before anybody even knew what W10 would look like. The only thing that really changed with W10, was that it provided the vessel through which UWP first started having an affect on the world of the average Windows desktop user. That is all.

The word "reboot" seems to be the term of the hour, particularly in regard to WP/WM. I hate it since it is devoid of any real meaning. The best thing about it is that we can all imagine it to mean whatever we want it to mean, which is why we all agree that we're witnessing one yet again. Still, out of all the ways "reboot" is being used, the transition from Win32 to UWP is probably the change that most deserves that label. UWP can be viewed as a brand new and entirely incompatible second OS that just happens to ship alongside Win32. The difference is far bigger than the last time MS managed such a transition, when Windows went from Win16 to Win32. Win32 could at least still run Win16 programs. UWP can not run Win32 programs... that's why W10 ships with both APIs.

This is one of the biggest changes to Windows in over two decades. You guys are right that UWP is about far more than just smartphone apps. I hope more come to understand that in time.

 

[nate0]

@a5cent
I agree. That term "reboot" should be used loosely. I am not familiar enough on the history of Windows nor did I expereicne first hand win16 to win32. So from your description puts things into perspective. Thanks.

 

[Drael646464]

Actually, it's not that new.

Despite WCentral's myriad attempts at muddying the waters around the term UWP, it's still (and always has been) an API and a runtime environment. UWP directly evolved out of WinRT, which first shipped with Windows RT back in 2012. MS had been working on WinRT already for many years prior to that. That is to say this transition is in no way a recent development. It reaches back far longer than two years. It started long before anybody even knew what W10 would look like. The only thing that really changed with W10, was that it provided the vessel through which UWP first started having an affect on the world of the average Windows desktop user. That is all.

The word "reboot" seems to be the term of the hour, particularly in regard to WP/WM. I hate it since it is devoid of any real meaning. The best thing about it is that we can all imagine it to mean whatever we want it to mean, which is why we all agree that we're witnessing one yet again. Still, out of all the ways "reboot" is being used, the transition from Win32 to UWP is probably the change that most deserves that label. UWP can be viewed as a brand new and entirely incompatible second OS that just happens to ship alongside Win32. The difference is far bigger than the last time MS managed such a transition, when Windows went from Win16 to Win32. Win32 could at least still run Win16 programs. UWP can not run Win32 programs... that's why W10 ships with both APIs.

This is one of the biggest changes to Windows in over two decades. You guys are right that UWP is about far more than just smartphone apps. I hope more come to understand that in time.

Sure its an evolution, true. Like the NT core was for XP (it existed 5 years before xp), its bringing together elements of the past. MSFT is good like that re-purposing elements of the past that worked.

But yeah, the main point on which you agree , is that its a reboot of the whole windows platform, its a huge task, a monumental shift for users and developers.

And I think in the timespan, even if in some ways its been longer than 2 years (like if your looking at XAML) it's doing pretty well.

It's funny how actually not many people 'get' what UWP actually is yet, in a way. You get people talking about 'the store' and 'apps', not really understanding that this is a modernized platform vision.

That just shows how radical it is, that most people still don't understand it yet. And the task that MS has in needing to communicate that to developers, and what it can offer them.

 

[Eric Tay]

Who knows, maybe MS will recompile the Silverlight app into UWP via another bridge?

 

[manjitrupbikram brahma]

Who knows, maybe MS will recompile the Silverlight app into UWP via another bridge?

Keeping all the doors and windows open I guess.