"Windows phones' free-fall may force Microsoft to push harder on Windows 10 adoption"

[Grant Taylor3]

Re: "Windows phones' free-fall may force Microsoft to push harder on Windows 10 adoption"

The raw numbers are not shocking if you actually paid attention to what MS is doing regarding phones.



MS told everyone they were sailing back there phone production hence the units sold. They are keeping the development of Windows 10 Mobile going.



Other OEM's will come in and sell phones. MS will continue to sell a small number of phones to the enthusiasts and people outside the USA who want to continue buying MS phones.

 

[aximtreo]

Even if the 950 had CDMA, Verizon said they would prevent the phone from working on their network. So it would have just been an extra unnecessary cost in production.

If memory serves me correctly, Verizon cannot refuse to activate a phone with CDMA bands. They can refuse to sell and support but not to activate. MS is already supporting WM phones on Verizon anyway.

 

[tgp]

Re: "Windows phones' free-fall may force Microsoft to push harder on Windows 10 adoption"

If memory serves me correctly, Verizon cannot refuse to activate a phone with CDMA bands. They can refuse to sell and support but not to activate.

Yes. I think this is the first post in this thread that about Verizon that is accurate. Verizon most certainly allows unbranded factory unlocked phones which support their network. In fact, I'm using one to post this.

 

[cracgor]

Re: "Windows phones' free-fall may force Microsoft to push harder on Windows 10 adoption"

Yes. I think this is the first post in this thread that about Verizon that is accurate. Verizon most certainly allows unbranded factory unlocked phones which support their network. In fact, I'm using one to post this.

I do not refute that you can use unbranded phones. But it was reported on WindowsCentral that they would not allow the 950 or 950xl to work on their networks. I can't find that article, but here is another one.

Verizon Reportedly Blocking Microsoft?s Lumia 950 And 950 XL: Report : TECH : Tech Times

 

[RumoredNow]

The "open devices" rule set by the FCC applies to Block C of the 700 MHz spectrum.

Verizon operates LTE on Band 13 in the C Block of 700 MHz and cannot, by FCC rules, deny a device access if it is Band 13 capable. Initially, after winning many licences for C Block at auction, Verizon sued the FCC to remove the "open devices" and "open applications" rules. Later Verizon dropped the suit and agreed to the conditions. This was famously played out later very publicly when the FCC ruled that Verizon could not legally request Google to block Apps in Google Play (like tethering Apps being marked "incompatible") for their branded devices.

What Verizon's FCC tethering settlement means to you (FAQ) - CNET


Band 12 (700 MHz Blocks A-C) and Band 17 (700 MHz Blocks B-C) have interoperability now or phasing in soon (market/carrier depending). There is no interoperability with Band 13. It is 13 or nothing. Neither the 950 nor the 950 XL has Band 13 LTE.

CDMA has nothing to do with it. You can enable CDMA on any/every phone. There is no legal precedent to force Verizon to activate that phone onto their network.

"Open devices" is a new rule and Google forced it to be applied to the C Block of 700 MHz. That is the only place, so far as I can find, in which the condition exists. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_2008_wireless_spectrum_auction

My feeling is that the end negotiation between Microsoft and Verizon left the best course for Microsoft to not even activate Band 13 LTE or enable CDMA so that users would not be able to force the phone onto a network that not only did not want the devices, but stated clearly they would do everything in their power to disrupt the devices.

 

[tgp]

Re: "Windows phones' free-fall may force Microsoft to push harder on Windows 10 adoption"

I do not refute that you can use unbranded phones. But it was reported on WindowsCentral that they would not allow the 950 or 950xl to work on their networks. I can't find that article, but here is another one.

Verizon Reportedly Blocking Microsoft?s Lumia 950 And 950 XL: Report : TECH : Tech Times

The article you linked does not say that Verizon would not allow the 950/XL to work on their network. And, this sentence

Due to the nature of CDMA networks, any devices riding on the band must first have their MEIDs (Mobile Equipment Identifier) added by the network.

in the article is not totally accurate. Verizon would not activate the Nexus 6 or the factory unlocked iPhone 6/+ either, but if you had an already activated SIM card, you could insert it and the phones would work perfectly. In fact, that is how I "activated" the Nexus 6 I currently use on Verizon. It is a pain in the neck, and requires another Verizon phone to activate the SIM card if you do not already have one, but it is possible.

Microsoft could have done the same with the new Lumias. The article even says that they have the hardware to work on Verizon, but Microsoft deliberately disabled the CDMA radio. When they go on to say that Verizon wouldn't have them anyway, they are likely referring to the fact that Verizon would not sell them or activate them. However, they still could have been used on Verizon the same way the Nexus 6, unlocked iPhones, and the Moto X Pure 2015 were used on Verizon.

From what we know, this one is on Microsoft.

CDMA has nothing to do with it. You can enable CDMA on any/every phone. There is no legal precedent to force Verizon to activate that phone onto their network.

This is technically correct. However, I do not believe everyone understands the difference between activate and allow. Verizon is not forced to activate any capable phone on their network, but they are forced to allow it. Again, as far as we know this one is on Microsoft.

 

[RumoredNow]

Re: "Windows phones' free-fall may force Microsoft to push harder on Windows 10 adoption"

This is technically correct. However, I do not believe everyone understands the difference between activate and allow. Verizon is not forced to activate any capable phone on their network, but they are forced to allow it. Again, as far as we know this one is on Microsoft.

True enough. As witnessed by any device being allowed to tether within permission of the contracted plan between Vzw and customer. I'm not convinced that activate has been fully tested in the rulings as the 3rd party grievance revolved around Play Apps being blocked from consumer view and not primary device access...

I'm sure it would take another class action suit to resolve that matter fully.

 

[a5cent]

Re: "Windows phones' free-fall may force Microsoft to push harder on Windows 10 adoption"

...but Microsoft deliberately disabled the CDMA radio. When they go on to say that Verizon wouldn't have them anyway, they are likely referring to the fact that Verizon would not sell them or activate them. However, they still could have been used on Verizon the same way the Nexus 6, unlocked iPhones, and the Moto X Pure 2015 were used on Verizon.

From what we know, this one is on Microsoft.

What exactly went down here is extremely murky. IMHO, from the little we know, we can't really know anything.

The fact remains that it's completely nonsensical for MS to willy-nilly and purposefully prevent their phones from working on the U.S.' most popular cellular network. It's so nonsensical in fact, that there is no way the statement "this one is on MS" is in any way believable. It's just not... We'd have to get into conspiracy theory territory where we believe forces within MS are themselves plotting to destroy WM. I think not...

Even if MS was stupid enough to give the 950/XL to AT&T as an exclusive, that still would not necessitate that they disable bands.

With the little we know, the only entity we can really blame, is the legal and business framework setup by U.S. carriers, because it's the only such framework in the world that fosters this kind of crap. Nowhere else in the world...

 

[MikeKata]

I firmly believe that MS has not abandoned WP. And this is why. Windows 10 for PC and WP10 share the same code (they are not the same OS, but they share a large part of the code). Windows 10 is trying to be an all-devices OS and it is doing extremely well. WP10 with Continuum is showing the direction of Microsoft's strategy. They have invested billions of dollars to this strategic plan (the unification of the platforms under one OS), they cannot abandon it like that. See how Google and Apple are trying to achieve that but they are failing. MS is at a great starting point and in my opinion, the reason they are not advertising WP10 so much is because the next 1-2 years, phones will be even more powerful and capable to run the full Windows 10.

Sent from my Lumia 640

 

[cmucodemonkey]

I firmly believe that MS has not abandoned WP. And this is why. Windows 10 for PC and WP10 share the same code (they are not the same OS, but they share a large part of the code). Windows 10 is trying to be an all-devices OS and it is doing extremely well. WP10 with Continuum is showing the direction of Microsoft's strategy. They have invested billions of dollars to this strategic plan (the unification of the platforms under one OS), they cannot abandon it like that.

I agree that Windows Mobile is still on Microsoft's radar, but it is clear that it is not Microsoft's priority. Just look at where new Microsoft apps are appearing first, Android and iOS. If Microsoft really wanted to show Windows Mobile as part of the Windows 10 "one-platform" strategy they should be releasing these apps for Windows Phone or in the very least Windows Insiders.

Before Windows 10 came out there used to be a joke that Apple computers were the best hardware to run Windows. Granted there is absolutely nothing wrong with Microsoft making apps for its various products on other OS's, but when your own OS becomes a second or third class citizen in your own apps that says something.

 

[Stef8600]

I firmly believe that MS has not abandoned WP. And this is why. Windows 10 for PC and WP10 share the same code (they are not the same OS, but they share a large part of the code). Windows 10 is trying to be an all-devices OS and it is doing extremely well. WP10 with Continuum is showing the direction of Microsoft's strategy. They have invested billions of dollars to this strategic plan (the unification of the platforms under one OS), they cannot abandon it like that. See how Google and Apple are trying to achieve that but they are failing. MS is at a great starting point and in my opinion, the reason they are not advertising WP10 so much is because the next 1-2 years, phones will be even more powerful and capable to run the full Windows 10.

Sent from my Lumia 640

MS started from a clean sheet when developing W10 and to achieve what they have in mind. I don't think Google and Apple dare to do that. They are leading the dance, MS had nothing to lose....
MS's most important strategy is getting W10 ready for a wide range of devices, Phones are a part of that range, but first things first...

 

[uselessrobot]

Microsoft has only themselves to blame for the continued failure of Windows Phone. However, given the state in which Windows 10 mobile was released I can't imagine they were surprised by this. My time with my Lumia 950 leads me to believe that I'm basically in an open beta. This is particularly evident when you compare it to the desktop version, which is extremely stable, although even that has some occasional annoying issues.

That would imply that they're working towards a more significant milestone with mobile. It would make sense, because mobile is far too important to abandon.

If Microsoft did release W10 mobile thinking it was a viable competitor then they've got much bigger problems to worry about.

 

[diapers]

And yet their revenues for most other departments have increased by small to significant margins.
Azure is up, office is up, search is up, surface is up, xbox is up.

They failed on the phone and that's a pretty huge deal. As a dev I was so disappointed in build, it was the one thing that was supposed to make investing in that platform viable and the simply gave up. The desktop is ok but there are massive eyeballs on mobile, if MS can't deliver there with their holygrail UWP then what's the point?

 

[newnews]

That is what MS wants! They tried everything to kill Lumia because Lumia takes 95% of WP market. They want to have other OEM make phones. However, I will say the strategy does not work at all.

 

[RumoredNow]

That is what MS wants! They tried everything to kill Lumia because Lumia takes 95% of WP market. They want to have other OEM make phones. However, I will say the strategy does not work at all.

How so? We have Continuum enabled phones out in some Regions and in the pipe elsewhere from OEMs. Also the number of white labels is on the rise and more original OEMs getting into the act.

Alcatel
Coship
HP
MCJ
NuAns
Vaio

 

[HeyCori]

I'm less concerned with Windows Phone's free fall and more concerned with how Microsoft plans to respond to it. Most of us agree (or have come to the realization) that selling phones is not Microsoft's priority. As of right now, Microsoft's only priority is to finish their numerous software projects.

Microsoft is banking on projects like Islandwood, Centennial, Xamarin, and the Anniversary update (desktop and mobile) to create a more unified Windows platform. Right now, Windows Phone is a promise Microsoft can't deliver. However, we all know that's where Microsoft wants to go. Microsoft wants the desktop to be synonymous with mobile (whether they get there is a different debate). And yes, that is going to take one Herculean effort.

But what comes after? How does Microsoft convince businesses (let alone the masses) that their new Windows Phone is a worthwhile investment? That's the one thing Microsoft doesn't seem to have a plan for. When a business or average consumer sees a product in a complete, BlackBerry style free fall, the job of convincing them to buy your hardware becomes much harder. Unfortunately, Nadella seems all too comfortable with the media's perception that Windows Phone is a dead product. Every Insider knows that the OS is far from dead, yet that isn't the message that the average consumer is getting from Microsoft. Sometimes marketing isn't putting up a big "buy me" sign in Times Square. Sometimes marketing is controlling the narrative, which is what Nadella should be doing more of.

Time is a finite resource. Nadella may find that by the time he does decide to "push" Windows Phone, even the faithful will have left him. Plus, he has to consider the harm he's doing to OEMs. Every new Windows Phone that hits the market is considered DOA. That's going to have a huge effect on potential sales and will only serve to drive more OEMs away from the Windows Phone market. Many of these new W10 devices may be the first and last we see from these companies.

 

[anon(6078578)]

Many of these new W10 devices may be the first and last we see from these companies.

It would certainly be interesting to know many devices T-Mobile's current Alcatel Windows Phone is currently selling. There is a more powerful version in the works, the Alcatel OneTouch Idol Pro 4 so it will be telling whether T-Mobile decides to sell this one too.

 

[newnews]

That is very small list

How so? We have Continuum enabled phones out in some Regions and in the pipe elsewhere from OEMs. Also the number of white labels is on the rise and more original OEMs getting into the act.

Alcatel
Coship
HP
MCJ
NuAns
Vaio

 

[RumoredNow]

That is very small list

And I'm sure I missed a couple...

You said:

That is what MS wants! They tried everything to kill Lumia because Lumia takes 95% of WP market. They want to have other OEM make phones. However, I will say the strategy does not work at all.

Does not work at all would imply no OEMs are trying W10M handsets.

The fact that HP is making their first smartphone since 2011 and are going all in with a high end W10M Continuum device AND creating a server side solution to get x86/x64 apps to devices for corporate clients AND creating a wide group of hardware add-ons to extend functionality... This tells me that HP is privy to information I as a consumer simply do not have access to yet. Re: Microsoft commitment to continuing in Mobile, supporting and working with OEMs and allowing OEMs to fill spaces rather than trying to squeeze them out as Nokia did along with future strategies and directions under the Microsoft timetable for the next several years.

Alcatel is building a "superphone" for W10M, they have a budget phone placed with an American Carrier (possibly the hugest gamble to gain a foothold on the US market in a decade) and also have an 8" tab running W10M that has telephony via speakerphone or headset to make a neat and tidy all in one solution for users in emerging economies.. Acer has a Continuum solution.

Again, what part of this says the strategy does not work at all?

What is it that these companies don't know? Do you suppose they are committing the amount of resources that producing such high end devices necessarily entails and their only intelligence is the many Blog posts that say Windows Phone is dead? Are we to assume that companies like HP, Alcatel, Viao, Acer and others are just creating a one off pit to throw money into with no plan for follow through? That it is all a charade? That they have not conferred with Microsoft? That Microsoft is burning it's bridges with partners by outright conning them into sinking money into devices that Microsoft won't support in future?

Please, explain the "does not work" part to me as if I'm stupid. I must be, because I can't see it as not working when companies are throwing so many resources at Windows in the mobile space.

 

[cracgor]

And I'm sure I missed a couple...

You said:


Does not work at all would imply no OEMs are trying W10M handsets.

The fact that HP is making their first smartphone since 2011 and are going all in with a high end W10M Continuum device AND creating a server side solution to get x86/x64 apps to devices for corporate clients AND creating a wide group of hardware add-ons to extend functionality... This tells me that HP is privy to information I as a consumer simply do not have access to yet. Re: Microsoft commitment to continuing in Mobile, supporting and working with OEMs and allowing OEMs to fill spaces rather than trying to squeeze them out as Nokia did along with future strategies and directions under the Microsoft timetable for the next several years.

Alcatel is building a "superphone" for W10M, they have a budget phone placed with an American Carrier (possibly the hugest gamble to gain a foothold on the US market in a decade) and also have an 8" tab running W10M that has telephony via speakerphone or headset to make a neat and tidy all in one solution for users in emerging economies.. Acer has a Continuum solution.

Again, what part of this says the strategy does not work at all?

What is it that these companies don't know? Do you suppose they are committing the amount of resources that producing such high end devices necessarily entails and their only intelligence is the many Blog posts that say Windows Phone is dead? Are we to assume that companies like HP, Alcatel, Viao, Acer and others are just creating a one off pit to throw money into with no plan for follow through? That it is all a charade? That they have not conferred with Microsoft? That Microsoft is burning it's bridges with partners by outright conning them into sinking money into devices that Microsoft won't support in future?

Please, explain the "does not work" part to me as if I'm stupid. I must be, because I can't see it as not working when companies are throwing so many resources at Windows in the mobile space.

I read it as "the strategy does not work" for the overall success of Windows Mobile; or increasing the number of Windows Mobile users to a viable third platform. Microsoft pulls back with the Lumia brand to allow more room for other companies. Other companies make phones. Now we have to see if it works.

The Alcatel "gamble" you mention sounds too eerily like Nokia's gamble.

Also, assuming the companies are making phones because there is some secret information is maybe less likely than Microsoft encouraging them to do it with some sort of assistance. By the Way, HP has been known to throw money into a pit without a plan from time to time (How HP doomed the TouchPad to failure | ZDNet).