Now Paul Thurrott is saying Windows Phone (Mobile) isn't dead. lol

[etphoto]

I think this goes hand in hand with Brad Sams hearing about a new approach. Add that to Evan Blass' tweet about things happening in Windows Mobile that will "blow your mind".

I believe they all heard something massive last week that caused the pessimism to make a u-turn.

I don't know what it is, but it sounds like Microsoft may have found a way forward AND partners to come along for the ride.

I have no info, but I've got a feeling that a phone like the HP Elite X3 will be on Verizon. Next week should be fun.

This ^

I'm sure it will be something he explains in detail during Windows Weekly this week.

Sent from my Surface 3

 

[Mr. MacPhisto]

This ^

I'm sure it will be something he explains in detail during Windows Weekly this week.

Sent from my Surface 3

Not Paul. He won't be on Windows Weekly. He's taking a three day mini-vacation with his family. Brad Sams will be on Windows Weekly.

But I expect that's intentional. Sams avoided talking too much after dropping the "what if there is a Surface Phone BUT Microsoft doesn't make it" bomb on Friday. That's around when Blass tweeted about hearing something jaw dropping.

Paul will be there for Windows Weekly next week - and that's when Mobile World Congress is happening. Two things have already leaked. Alcatel is making a premium phone with Continuum and a Snapdragon 820. HP is making a Snapdragon 820 based phablet. Would not be surprised if there's more.

 

[anon(6078578)]

Thurrott, Rubino, Warren, Foley are just awful. The good analysts and reporters are following Apple or Google.

Really? You mean because they say it like it is? That's a bit of a broad biased statement to say that "The good analysts and reporters are following Apple or Google" Personally I like to hear the bad with the good. If anything they come across as more genuine than many tech reporters. Paul especially comes across to me as a human being. You can see he is a windows phone fan who is disappointed. Microsoft is his bread and butter. The fact that he is sometimes a bit pessimistic shows he is not just a front for Microsoft but covers it out of passion. I don't agree with everything he says but I don't blow him off because he thinks Windows Phone may be dead.

 

[TechFreak1]

Who cares what Thurrott or any of these "experts" thinks.

Same can be said for the naysayers and those of us who are optimistic - as everyone has an opinion therefore they are not facts - unfortunately some act like they are.

Least, we the general public as a whole can be is civil when discussing or sharing opinions as opposed to acting like toddlers fighting over the last piece of candy.

 

[ScrubbyXD]

It's pretty clear that Microsoft is moving to make money or at least break even on the current x50 line. Thus bringing it's phone offerings in-line with it's other hardware offerings as "model" type devices for their software. With the end game encouraging OEMs to make the hardware and Microsoft licensing Windows software as they have traditionally done.

I have said for a long time, and I still believe, that the Qualcomm deal was a major reason mobile efforts failed. Google simply out "open"ed Microsoft by being both usable on any hardware and being open source. So despite Windows Phone being free or nearly it's still hobbled by the Qualcomm SoC requirement. This makes phones with windows still more expensive to produce in a world of very low margin phones.

So is "Windows Phone" dead because it has to be? If the mobile SKU of W10 is simply that, another SKU of windows 10, does the Qualcomm deal apply? Probably not. If this is true then the mobile version can now have any chip including x86/x64.

Now the value proposition changes. As an OEM I could now release a mobile device that is not just another android clone. I can use an expanding (see articles lately of who Microsoft is looking to hire) array of hardware, that will be updated by someone else (see articles on Samsung and others being sued because they do not update phones under two years) for years to come. This last point is very important because at these low margins OEMs cannot afford to support the lower end phones for the time it looks like they will soon be (by law) required. This is the same model as Windows PCs that they are used to and enjoy. As a cherry on top Microsoft is no longer trying to undercut them.

Could these devices be profitable? Yes!

Don't fool yourself on the "App-gap". If these mobile devices start being offered on a larger scale and are sold, those Universal apps will come. Software designers are many things but stupid isn't one of them (in most cases).

I'm not saying ANYTHING is going to be saved but I am saying Windows on your phone has a legitimate chance. Time will tell.

 

[jdballard]

It's interesting that both him and Daniel are saying similar things.

I thought the same thing: that on the same day they both publish articles with the same theme. Makes me think that someone at MS reached out (at least unofficially) to tell them the direction.

Thurrott, Rubino, Warren, Foley are just awful. The good analysts and reporters are following Apple or Google.

Well, Chris Capossella from MS was on Windows Weekly the week between Christmas and New Years and made the comment that he's amazed at how often Paul Thurrott and Mary Jo Foley are correct not only in what they're reporting (things that MS hasn't officially announced) but their analysis as well. So unless he's sucking up to them, which he doesn't have to do, I would disagree.

Side note: apparently Chris Capossella is a regular listener of windows weekly.

 

[Mad Cabbie]

I read Scrubbyxd's well thought out post, and as a 'former' Samsung user I am pleased the world has stood up and cornered Samsung. My note 3 was left behind before the warranty had expired! Updates? What updates? Got an Ace 3 in the drawer. Lte etc, but stuck on 4.2.2 which can restrict certain Bluetooth accessories.

I also take issue with the whole Google Android 'open source' claim. It is becoming far from open source. HTC started it with s-off and Samsung locked it right down with Knox.

Anyways, as said by scrubby, let's hope the Qualcomm issue can be resolved and then unleash the beast.

 

[Jean Claude Lopez]

I don't understand why he writes about Microsoft.

 

[Jack Neill]

My magic 8 ball broke years ago, but I want the platform to succeed. Yes, its been a crappy ride, but I don't really want a future with Google and Apple as the only choices. I hope it makes it, even if it is just a minor player. Keep hope alive!!

 

[Johnny Tremaine]

There's an argument to be made that Windows Phone was never really alive. In 2013, when Nokia sold a record 9 million Lumias in a quarter, Android was activating over one million devices A DAY! Does that sound alive to anyone? The gap between the Xbox One and PS4 isn't even that bad. So even when Windows Phone was doing "good" it was still getting absolutely destroyed.

True, sales were on a very small uptick during the Ballmer era.
Also true, sales were still embarrassingly bad under the Ballmer era.

The way the current demise of Windows Phone is framed is as though this use to be a legitimate three horse race until Nadella purposely kneecapped its own product. Selling less than 1/10 of your competitor isn't a race. You've already lost.

And let's not forget that Nokia was hemorrhaging money for most of their Windows Phone venture. Windows Phone wasn't selling enough and it was losing massive amounts of money. Nadella didn't kill Windows Phone. He was handed a zombie OS. This idea that Windows Phone was doing fine until Nadella arrived is a myth.

I understand, selling 9 million in a quarter is better than the 4.5 million Microsoft sold last quarter. Neither is good, though. Both are laughable when compared to the competition. A shift in strategy was absolutely necessary.

We could argue all day about what that strategy should be, but we must stop this misconception that selling less than 1/10 your competitor and losing hundreds of millions of dollars every quarter was sustainable.

Well said, and spot on.

 

[Johnny Tremaine]

but I don't really want a future with Google and Apple as the only choices.

That future is now. By definition once marketshare (of largely low end phone devices; buyers of such devices for the most part, don't use mobile apps much) dropped down to 1-2%, going backwards, the game was over for Microsoft's mobile OS ambitions.

 

[sumton]

What's the difference?

The title of his article is "A Way Forward For Windows Phone". (Not Windows mobile)

"Microsoft is keeping the Windows phone platform that I care about alive and is delivering new handsets.". (Windows Phone, not mobile)

Sent from my Surface 3

( Yes, Windows phones will limp along in the retail market for all the same reasons as before: There are no apps, few carriers promote these devices over iPhone or Android, and Microsoft’s “narrowed focus” results in less availability and visibility for the only Windows phones that were selling in any appreciable numbers. In this sense, Windows phone is what I said it was, a “zombie” platform. Not quite dead. But not quite alive either.

But Windows 10 Mobile, the new OS at the heart of these Windows phones, continues forward too because it is just another SKU, or product version, of Windows 10. It is the version of Windows 10 aimed at ARM-based phones, phablets, and mini-tablets, but there’s no reason to think that it couldn’t be used in other device types too. Asking whether Windows 10 Mobile is “dead” or “unsuccessful” is like asking the same of Windows 10 Home or Enterprise. It’s just another Windows 10 version.)

anyway im not going to waste time defending him

 

[Nogitsune Micah]

. To switch to a different company, and build up trusted contacts would take a long time. And then, when Google would start to falter, should they switch to whatever the new dominant platform would be? It would be a constant chase. That is why for better or worse, these reporters will probably continue to follow Microsoft.

Isn't Paul on iOS now though? Lmao or is that tom? I get them all so confused.

 

[TechAbstract]

It's pretty clear that Microsoft is moving to make money or at least break even on the current x50 line. Thus bringing it's phone offerings in-line with it's other hardware offerings as "model" type devices for their software. With the end game encouraging OEMs to make the hardware and Microsoft licensing Windows software as they have traditionally done.

I have said for a long time, and I still believe, that the Qualcomm deal was a major reason mobile efforts failed. Google simply out "open"ed Microsoft by being both usable on any hardware and being open source. So despite Windows Phone being free or nearly it's still hobbled by the Qualcomm SoC requirement. This makes phones with windows still more expensive to produce in a world of very low margin phones.

So is "Windows Phone" dead because it has to be? If the mobile SKU of W10 is simply that, another SKU of windows 10, does the Qualcomm deal apply? Probably not. If this is true then the mobile version can now have any chip including x86/x64.

Now the value proposition changes. As an OEM I could now release a mobile device that is not just another android clone. I can use an expanding (see articles lately of who Microsoft is looking to hire) array of hardware, that will be updated by someone else (see articles on Samsung and others being sued because they do not update phones under two years) for years to come. This last point is very important because at these low margins OEMs cannot afford to support the lower end phones for the time it looks like they will soon be (by law) required. This is the same model as Windows PCs that they are used to and enjoy. As a cherry on top Microsoft is no longer trying to undercut them.

Could these devices be profitable? Yes!

Don't fool yourself on the "App-gap". If these mobile devices start being offered on a larger scale and are sold, those Universal apps will come. Software designers are many things but stupid isn't one of them (in most cases).

I'm not saying ANYTHING is going to be saved but I am saying Windows on your phone has a legitimate chance. Time will tell.

Totally agree. Microsoft needs to do everything they can to get the OEMs on board. You can't get market share without having devices to sell and no marketing.

 

[loribinca]

IMHO "Windows Mobile" or whatever the heck they're calling it has a very long way to go before it becomes relevant.

No NFC payments, and I'm still not convinced that the "App Gap" will ever close ..

I'm taking a break from it and am back swimming in the IOS pool, Sure the home screen is not as functional as WP 8.1 and it takes a little longer to get to stuff, but overall the pro's outweigh the cons for me.

Coupled with the Apple watch - say what you like about it, but the fact that you can customize the heck out of it with 3rd party straps really makes it look more classy than the band/band2 - and I'm a pretty happy camper at the moment.

The only MS product I use now is my Surface Pro 3

 

[Nogitsune Micah]

IMHO "Windows Mobile" or whatever the heck they're calling it has a very long way to go before it becomes relevant.

No NFC payments, and I'm still not convinced that the "App Gap" will ever close ..

I'm taking a break from it and am back swimming in the IOS pool, Sure the home screen is not as functional as WP 8.1 and it takes a little longer to get to stuff, but overall the pro's outweigh the cons for me.

Coupled with the Apple watch - say what you like about it, but the fact that you can customize the heck out of it with 3rd party straps really makes it look more classy than the band/band2 - and I'm a pretty happy camper at the moment.

The only MS product I use now is my Surface Pro 3

How exactly can you compare an Apple watch compared to a band? Don't they target two completely demographics? Especially since the Apple watch is made specifically FOR APPLE products vs the band which I do believe is agnostic. So having nifty 3rd party straps seems like a trendy fashion statement vs overall use and actual you know....relevance for the core product. Then again, owning an iPhone is a trendy fashion statement for many, so I digress.

 

[Nogitsune Micah]

Goodness, typos galore....typed on the outdated WC app

We should also get rid of this misconception that because Microsoft is not selling as much or anywhere near their competitors that the product is an outright failure. I never did understand this mentality that Product A/Person A isn't doing as well as the next guy so because that criteria, that means it/they suck.

Windows Phone success isn't contingent on IOS/Android but itself. If I am not mistaken, do feel free to correct me if I am wrong. but Android is the most popular mobile OS, yes? It is defintiely being sold more and activated at a higher rate than the other mobile OS. That does not detract from Apple's success with their own products (Which seems to set new sales records for Apple with each release). So why is WIndows Phone sales (paltry as they may be in comparison) being held to some double-standard to try and prove it is failures.

Windows PC far outsell macs and yet if I am not mistaken Apple STILL has success within their mac products and unlike many OEMs, Apple does make a profit (Again if I am not mistaken) on their product with their pathetic marketshare.

Point is, this double-standard with Windows Phone is more annoying than anything. When I look at Microsoft's success and failures, I look at its origin points from 2010...where it peaked...and where it fell dramatically and that is how i measure the platform's success or failure. Because common sense, would say that Microsoft has never been able to match Android/Apple so why exactly are we using their sales in comparison to dictate whether the product is successful or not.

This change in strategy likely will not have an effect...because essentially this strategy is what Windows Phone 7 launched with. Relying on OEMs which in turn did nothing for WP...Ironically abandoning their Windows Phone 8 mentality(And the Lumia strategy) during Nokia's reign is seemingly what appears to be killing Windows Phone. Since this change in strategy, not only are people irate with the OS but they are now rebelling against hardware as well in favor of abandoning the platform altogether. Coupled with Microsoft lack of releases and now trying to push OEMs(Again, when most don't want OEM phones), Microsoft's failures are and should be dictated by their own actions...not in comparison to how much Apple/Google sell their products.

There's an argument to be made that Windows Phone was never really alive. In 2013, when Nokia sold a record 9 million Lumias in a quarter, Android was activating over one million devices A DAY! Does that sound alive to anyone? The gap between the Xbox One and PS4 isn't even that bad. So even when Windows Phone was doing "good" it was still getting absolutely destroyed.

True, sales were on a very small uptick during the Ballmer era.
Also true, sales were still embarrassingly bad during the Ballmer era.

The way the current demise of Windows Phone is framed is as though this was a legitimate three horse race until Nadella purposely kneecapped its own product. Selling less than 1/10 of your competitor isn't a race. You've already lost.

And let's not forget that Nokia was hemorrhaging money for most of their Windows Phone venture. So Windows Phone wasn't selling enough and it was losing massive amounts of money. Nadella didn't kill Windows Phone. He was handed a zombie OS. This idea that Windows Phone was doing fine until Nadella arrived is a myth.

I understand, selling 9 million in a quarter is better than the 4.5 million Microsoft sold last quarter. Neither is good, though. Both are laughable when compared to the competition. A shift in strategy was absolutely necessary.

We could argue all day about what that strategy should be, but we must stop this misconception that selling less than 1/10 your competitor and losing hundreds of millions of dollars every quarter was sustainable.

 

[jdballard]

(Again, when most dont want OEM phones)

I would say it is (and was) the lame, second-rate OEM hardware, but there's no real way to tell. The closest to a non-Nokia/MS flagship I can think of is the HTC One M8. I had one and would have kept it a lot longer than I did except that camera was awful. But even if Samsung put Windows on one of their flagships, without the apps would it sell any better? These days, probably not, but back in the day? Maybe.

We may never know what might have been if there had been some really nice hardware on Windows phone then. Just a little more momentum earlier could have made a difference. I am really curious to see what hardware comes out of MWC. There are a few leaks already and supposedly some other big things coming. But even if it is amazing hardware it's probably too little too late.

 

[anon(6078578)]

I would say it is (and was) the lame, second-rate OEM hardware, but there's no real way to tell. The closest to a non-Nokia/MS flagship I can think of is the HTC One M8. I had one and would have kept it a lot longer than I did except that camera was awful. But even if Samsung put Windows on one of their flagships, without the apps would it sell any better? These days, probably not, but back in the day? Maybe.

We may never know what might have been if there had been some really nice hardware on Windows phone then. Just a little more momentum earlier could have made a difference. I am really curious to see what hardware comes out of MWC. There are a few leaks already and supposedly some other big things coming. But even if it is amazing hardware it's probably too little too late.

That's the problem, Microsoft always seemed to have this "word of mouth" attitude to the sale of Windows Phone. They never really did much of a push in advertising. When I got the Nokia 521 it looked like things were finally on the up. In fact that was why I joined. If I hadn't been a technology enthusiast always reading up about technology I am not sure I would've even noticed the Nokia 521. Then shortly afterwards it started going downhill.

 

[Nogitsune Micah]

I would say it is (and was) the lame, second-rate OEM hardware, but there's no real way to tell. The closest to a non-Nokia/MS flagship I can think of is the HTC One M8. I had one and would have kept it a lot longer than I did except that camera was awful. But even if Samsung put Windows on one of their flagships, without the apps would it sell any better? These days, probably not, but back in the day? Maybe.

We may never know what might have been if there had been some really nice hardware on Windows phone then. Just a little more momentum earlier could have made a difference. I am really curious to see what hardware comes out of MWC. There are a few leaks already and supposedly some other big things coming. But even if it is amazing hardware it's probably too little too late.

This is one thing I never understood. People think an influx of OEMs will change things and seem to think Microsoft lessening devices in favor of of oem support will change things but still the os is stable for all and the app situation is better, you will just have a bunch of nice hardware that still isn't selling.

I'm hoping for a secret Microsoft release at mwc haha