What I think Microsoft needs to do in order to gain market shares in the handset market.

[Reflexx]

Here's a point that must cause a lot of problems for Windows Phone in the market... people who like windows are often disappointed by Windows Phone because it doesn't really have a anything to do with windows. A totally different experience. Microsoft should make Windows Phone more like windows. Windows fans will then love it and tell all their friends.
Don't underestimate the number of people who like windows. The market penetration of windows is huge, far larger than even Android. I don't have any statistics to hand, so you will have to judge this one for yourself, but I would guess that over 90% of people have access to at least one window.

Keep in mind that there is a new paradigm in interaction with computers.

With touch gaining popularity, the old way of interacting with PCs will be going away for consumers. It's like the command line. Consumers dont use it.

Windows itself is changing. Windows is meeting Windows Phone halfway. The UI is going to stay tile based.

For developers, the unification of the trunk will make it much easier to create applications that run on a variety of devices.

Eventually Windows RT and Windows Phone wwillbe the same thing, just with a different skin.

 

[N_LaRUE]

Here's a point that must cause a lot of problems for Windows Phone in the market... people who like windows are often disappointed by Windows Phone because it doesn't really have a anything to do with windows. A totally different experience. Microsoft should make Windows Phone more like windows. Windows fans will then love it and tell all their friends.
Don't underestimate the number of people who like windows. The market penetration of windows is huge, far larger than even Android. I don't have any statistics to hand, so you will have to judge this one for yourself, but I would guess that over 90% of people have access to at least one window.

You're looking at it the wrong way.

If you saw a picture of WP8 WRT and W8 (on the metro interface) you'll notice one thing that's very common about them.... they all look the same.

Now I'm not going to disagree with the fact that WP8 needs to have more functionality and this will hopefully come in WP8.1. However it won't become Windows because Windows is becoming more like WP.

I'm taking a stab at this as there's no evidence to my thoughts here but this what I think is going to happen.

I believe eventually there won't be a desktop on a Windows PC or I should say there will be one but it won't be necessary to access it as everything you need to do will be in the Metro interface.

I also see this as advantageous for IT administration as it would make it easier to limit people's functions. At least this is how I see it.

Why didn't MS do this with W8? Simple, they were trying to make it a transition from one state to the other. However it hasn't worked and we've seen with the hysterics with the simple removal of the Start button that people simply aren't ready for it and change is hard for a lot of people. I personally hated the Start button.

So this is how I see things. WP will continue to improve. Windows RT will become more tablet based and will probably drop the desktop completely. Windows PC will become a Metro interface system only but still have access to a desktop when necessary (rarely). So in essence you'll have three systems acting very similar.

I believe this is the direction their heading. I'm looking forward to it. I think they have some bugs to iron out and I think they have some other bits to straighten out but I think this is what we're going to see in the future. The days of Windows used in desktop environment I think will be over.

On another note I personally think they should have just jumped right into this system. The howls would have been very loud but I think people would have been more accepting and all the noise surrounding the 'jarring' experience of W8 and W8.1 with regards to desktop/metro transition wouldn't be mentioned as it wouldn't exist.

 

[Ek-Balam]

Keep in mind that there is a new paradigm in interaction with computers.

With touch gaining popularity, the old way of interacting with PCs will be going away for consumers. It's like the command line. Consumers dont use it.

Windows itself is changing. Windows is meeting Windows Phone halfway. The UI is going to stay tile based.

For developers, the unification of the trunk will make it much easier to create applications that run on a variety of devices.

Eventually Windows RT and Windows Phone wwillbe the same thing, just with a different skin.

Question / Idea......

Wouldn't it be easier for MS to re-architect the Surface RT hardware to dump the nVIDIA Tegra and adopt a Intel / AMD Atom type x86 CISC proc.? Power dissipation and graphics performance is becoming pretty darn close between to two lately. They would have a built in app base and I would think it would be a lot easier for developers to port / scale Win 8.1 apps to the RT architecture...

 

[a5cent]

Wouldn't it be easier for MS to re-architect the Surface RT hardware to dump the nVIDIA Tegra and adopt a Intel / AMD Atom type x86 CISC proc.? Power dissipation and graphics performance is becoming pretty darn close between to two lately. They would have a built in app base and I would think it would be a lot easier for developers to port / scale Win 8.1 apps to the RT architecture...

No. The Windows kernel is ported to ARM, and with that, the matter of drivers is the only other issue left to worry about. For all but a handful of engineers at MS, it is completely irrelevant on which processor architecture the OS runs. For app developers, in terms of how they write software, there is really no difference at all.

You also need to realize that the difference between Windows RT and Windows is primarily grounded in marketing. Both are basically the same OS. The only real difference is that MS doesn't allow the installation of desktop software on Windows RT (only MS can do that, e.g. Office). That is a miniscule difference considering that most people view these as two distinct operating systems. My point is that developers don't need to port anything between the two, because they are basically one and the same.

If you want to get a traditional desktop app running in the metro environment, well, that will necessitate a porting effort, but that isn't related to the operating systems themselves. In that scenario, developers are porting software between two different runtime environments, both of which are supported by both OS' (again, with RT not allowing the installation of desktop software).

 

[Ek-Balam]

No. The Windows kernel is ported to ARM, and with that, the matter of drivers is the only other issue left to worry about. For all but a handful of engineers at MS, it is completely irrelevant on which processor architecture the OS runs. For app developers, in terms of how they write software, there is really no difference at all.

You also need to realize that the difference between Windows RT and Windows is primarily grounded in marketing. Both are basically the same OS. The only real difference is that MS doesn't allow the installation of desktop software on Windows RT (only MS can do that, e.g. Office). That is a miniscule difference considering that most people view these as two distinct operating systems. My point is that developers don't need to port anything between the two, because they are basically one and the same.

If you want to get a traditional desktop app running in the metro environment, well, that will necessitate a porting effort, but that isn't related to the operating systems themselves. In that scenario, developers are porting software between two different runtime environments, both of which are supported by both OS' (again, with RT not allowing the installation of desktop software).

Thanks for the detailed reply and education! This has broadened my understanding....