The Windows 10 April 2018 update has arrived! Get the new Dell XPS 15, starting at $999.99
06-25-2016 10:20 AM
106 1234 ...
tools
  1. Spectrum90's Avatar
    I think Microsoft are doing the right thing by focusing more on the business market and also making "proof of concept" devices - it's worked well for them on the desktop side. W10M may yet survive in the consumer market as well - what will decide that is if (A) enough OEMs make devices, particularly filling the gaps in the emerging markets where Lumia was doing well and (B) how much traction UWP gets on the desktop, which should close the mobile app gap.
    The only benefit of choosing a W10M over Android and iOS is Continuum. The biggest drawbacks are the lack of apps and the immaturity of the OS.

    I expect Android and iOS will implement something like Continuum in the next few years. Of course Microsoft still has an advantage because UWP apps are designed to run in Windows 10 PCs. However, for the vast majority of consumers the most important part of the experience in a converged device is Mobile. Microsoft could improve W10M and make it the best mobile OS. However, the UWP strategy was a total failure in solving the app problem. People are not using apps on PCs and the number of W10M users is insignificant. There is no demand for Apps in the Windows platform.

    The mobile side of W10M is so weak the I don't thing Continuum could save Windows, not even in the enterprise market. Enterprise users need consumers oriented apps and enterprise specific apps. Companies won't invest in W10M with this level of uncertainty.

    As Google is bringing Android apps to its desktop OS, Microsoft really needs to innovate to survive in the client side. Within the current trajectory Windows dies. A converged Chrome-Android OS is free, simpler, faster and more secure.
    06-02-2016 08:50 PM
  2. Pete's Avatar
    I'm not sure that an Android OS would ever be as secure as a Microsoft OS any time soon unless Google make fundamental changes to the way it issues OS updates. How many times do ordinary Android users get OS updates for their devices (if at all)?
    RumoredNow and azilgath like this.
    06-03-2016 02:10 AM
  3. Laura Knotek's Avatar
    I'm not sure that an Android OS would ever be as secure as a Microsoft OS any time soon unless Google make fundamental changes to the way it issues OS updates. How many times do ordinary Android users get OS updates for their devices (if at all)?
    That would be the Android OEMs, not Google. Nexus devices get monthly updates.
    06-03-2016 02:15 AM
  4. Laura Knotek's Avatar
    The only benefit of choosing a W10M over Android and iOS is Continuum. The biggest drawbacks are the lack of apps and the immaturity of the OS.

    I expect Android and iOS will implement something like Continuum in the next few years. Of course Microsoft still has an advantage because UWP apps are designed to run in Windows 10 PCs. However, for the vast majority of consumers the most important part of the experience in a converged device is Mobile. Microsoft could improve W10M and make it the best mobile OS. However, the UWP strategy was a total failure in solving the app problem. People are not using apps on PCs and the number of W10M users is insignificant. There is no demand for Apps in the Windows platform.

    The mobile side of W10M is so weak the I don't thing Continuum could save Windows, not even in the enterprise market. Enterprise users need consumers oriented apps and enterprise specific apps. Companies won't invest in W10M with this level of uncertainty.

    As Google is bringing Android apps to its desktop OS, Microsoft really needs to innovate to survive in the client side. Within the current trajectory Windows dies. A converged Chrome-Android OS is free, simpler, faster and more secure.
    I believe that it is too early to tell.

    Many enterprises still have not upgraded to Windows 10 and won't for a while.

    Who's to say that enterprises won't use UWP apps once they complete their upgrades to Windows 10?
    06-03-2016 02:17 AM
  5. Pete's Avatar
    That would be the Android OEMs, not Google. Nexus devices get monthly updates.
    This is true. But anyone using an older device or anything that isn't a Nexus (or certain Samsung devices) is at risk.
    Laura Knotek likes this.
    06-03-2016 02:24 AM
  6. Laura Knotek's Avatar
    This is true. But anyone using an older device or anything that isn't a Nexus (or certain Samsung devices) is at risk.
    The BlackBerry Priv also gets monthly updates.
    Guytronic likes this.
    06-03-2016 02:29 AM
  7. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    This is true. But anyone using an older device or anything that isn't a Nexus (or certain Samsung devices) is at risk.
    Unfortunately in the world of mobile the OEMs don't like to spend money on 'old' products, this means anything older than 6 months from experience.

    However, with Android N this will hopefully change where Google will be able to make security updates to the OS without the need for going through the OEM.

    Of course this doesn't help the current batch and older phones out there and the issues OEMs have with product life vs ROI.
    06-03-2016 02:45 AM
  8. Pete's Avatar
    The BlackBerry Priv also gets monthly updates.
    There's still at least 87% of active Android devices that don't have up to date software, or any hope of updates.

    ?Android security a 'market for lemons' that leaves 87 percent vulnerable | ZDNet

    The graph at the top of this article is quite telling. New devices get updates for a period and then get overtaken when never devices come on to the market. There might be a point at which users of older devices upgrade, but for many consumers, that will only happen when their devices stop working (my mother has a phone running Android 2.2 and she's ok with that, but she's fairly oblivious of the security risks).

    Basically speaking, to be secure in the Android ecosystem, you need a relatively new device from a major manufacturer.

    With Windows, you just need to have moved past Windows XP and an internet connection.
    06-03-2016 02:55 AM
  9. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    I believe that it is too early to tell.

    Many enterprises still have not upgraded to Windows 10 and won't for a while.

    Who's to say that enterprises won't use UWP apps once they complete their upgrades to Windows 10?
    The term enterprise is used very generally I find. What exactly entails an 'enterprise'? Small companies? Medium? Large corps?

    Term is fairly confusing to me and I don't think it's my personal 'traditionalist' mindset but I've always seen enterprise as medium to large corps but it seems people use that term for anything 'connected'.

    When it comes to upgrades, medium and large corps are the slowest but even some small companies hate change as well. So to suggest 'enterprise' will jump on the W10 bandwagon just because it's 'neat' and there's some 'possible' advantages is moot to most.

    Cost is the biggest driving factor when it comes to upgrades followed by possible down time and ensuring that things still work.

    Using my company as a small example, a large corporation, we just upgraded to Win 7, Office 2007 fairly recently. Yeah, Office 2007... it was Office 2003 and Xp when I started four years ago.

    We just recently have been able to use other internet browsers, with strict access to certain things, for example social media is out. I can't access my Outlook email. Strangely I can access most Google services.

    I don't see an upgrade to W10 any time soon here. Let alone using UWP apps. There would have to be a very very good reason presented by MS to provide a reason for the change and for out IT services to agree. Not seeing that happening.

    I have little doubt this type of scenario is playing out in many companies world wide. Change in OS for PCs is a big thing for most corporations and one they won't do unless they have to. So it's likely that the company I work for will use Win 7 until they're forced to change and I think many others will do that same.

    MS has a lot to prove to enterprise that change to W10 is worth it. I don't see that happening.
    06-03-2016 02:57 AM
  10. Pete's Avatar
    Unfortunately in the world of mobile the OEMs don't like to spend money on 'old' products, this means anything older than 6 months from experience.

    However, with Android N this will hopefully change where Google will be able to make security updates to the OS without the need for going through the OEM.

    Of course this doesn't help the current batch and older phones out there and the issues OEMs have with product life vs ROI.
    This is true. Google in the past has only really rewarded affluent users with the tastiest candy. Hopefully N will change that, but many people will still have to buy new hardware to get it.
    06-03-2016 02:59 AM
  11. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    This is true. Google in the past has only really rewarded affluent users with the tastiest candy. Hopefully N will change that, but many people will still have to buy new hardware to get it.
    Not much different than buying a new handset to get W10M? There are always people wanting the newest thing. The challenge for OEMs and Google is convincing people to upgrade

    This goes for any product supplier.
    06-03-2016 03:04 AM
  12. Pete's Avatar
    MS has a lot to prove to enterprise that change to W10 is worth it. I don't see that happening.
    This is the basics of it. I work for a pretty large billion dollar corporation, we're all running Windows 7 here. Corporations will only typically make large changes like this because there's a financial or compliance related reason to do so. Right now, there's no reason to move away from Windows 7.

    It's a huge cost in terms of migration. A year ago, we had over 400 corporate applications in use by the business; this is being brought down to under 200, but still requires a huge amount of testing to ensure it all works with Windows 10 (whenever that happens).

    Any thought of using apps (in the Windows 10 sense of the word) isn't even on the horizon and won't be until there's a point at which Microsoft kills the desktop/full fat version of MS Office.
    06-03-2016 03:12 AM
  13. Pete's Avatar
    Not much different than buying a new handset to get W10M? There are always people wanting the newest thing. The challenge for OEMs and Google is convincing people to upgrade

    This goes for any product supplier.
    The insider program gives customers with some older handsets access to Windows 10 Mobile, but I take your point there. Users of desktop/tablet version of Windows always have had regular security updates. As a side note, Windows Phone 7/8.x was pretty secure out of the box and I've never seen any articles relating to security exploits (at least for people who didn't spend a lot of time and effort in unlocking their devices to install interops or that awful Astoria thing).
    06-03-2016 03:17 AM
  14. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    The insider program gives customers with some older handsets access to Windows 10 Mobile, but I take your point there. Users of desktop/tablet version of Windows always have had regular security updates. As a side note, Windows Phone 7/8.x was pretty secure out of the box and I've never seen any articles relating to security exploits (at least for people who didn't spend a lot of time and effort in unlocking their devices to install interops or that awful Astoria thing).
    The Insider Program is great but it has it's limitations I think.

    Oh I don't disagree that Android didn't have issues and still does. I just believe that all hardware/software has a point of change. Windows had it's time and now Android will have it's major shift. I'm sure there will be more in the future.

    Google has started to take security a lot more seriously lately and MS has as well. I think that's beneficial to everyone.

    I could make a point that Windows on PC is still the most targeted OS in the world for hackers but that's a given considering the number of users.
    06-03-2016 03:26 AM
  15. Cruachan 11's Avatar
    The only benefit of choosing a W10M over Android and iOS is Continuum. The biggest drawbacks are the lack of apps and the immaturity of the OS.

    I expect Android and iOS will implement something like Continuum in the next few years. Of course Microsoft still has an advantage because UWP apps are designed to run in Windows 10 PCs. However, for the vast majority of consumers the most important part of the experience in a converged device is Mobile. Microsoft could improve W10M and make it the best mobile OS. However, the UWP strategy was a total failure in solving the app problem. People are not using apps on PCs and the number of W10M users is insignificant. There is no demand for Apps in the Windows platform.

    The mobile side of W10M is so weak the I don't thing Continuum could save Windows, not even in the enterprise market. Enterprise users need consumers oriented apps and enterprise specific apps. Companies won't invest in W10M with this level of uncertainty.

    As Google is bringing Android apps to its desktop OS, Microsoft really needs to innovate to survive in the client side. Within the current trajectory Windows dies. A converged Chrome-Android OS is free, simpler, faster and more secure.
    Continuum being the only benefit is entirely subjective. As others have pointed out, Android is not a very secure OS for the most part, and if you use iOS you are in Apple's walled garden which means it's much more difficult to put your own media on a device and you are forced to use Apple's proprietry standards for your accessories.

    I also think it's far too early to say that UWP is a failure. W10M only launched officially 6 months ago. How much traction in the market did iOS or Android have and how many apps were in their stores after 6 months?
    06-03-2016 04:26 AM
  16. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    Continuum being the only benefit is entirely subjective. As others have pointed out, Android is not a very secure OS for the most part, and if you use iOS you are in Apple's walled garden which means it's much more difficult to put your own media on a device and you are forced to use Apple's proprietry standards for your accessories.

    I also think it's far too early to say that UWP is a failure. W10M only launched officially 6 months ago. How much traction in the market did iOS or Android have and how many apps were in their stores after 6 months?
    You should go back and read things again.

    Android is secure, older, not updated devices are the issue. So be clear on that. Similar to people using Windows Xp still.

    Also the combining of Android and Chrome is still new and has 'similar' ideas as Continuum. Taking it one step further, Google also has apps available on Windows via Chrome browser. Just like MS has apps on Android.

    I do however agree with the rest you have stated. Though I'm still not convinced about UWP at the moment.
    Tien-Lin Chang likes this.
    06-03-2016 04:31 AM
  17. Cruachan 11's Avatar
    You should go back and read things again.

    Android is secure, older, not updated devices are the issue. So be clear on that. Similar to people using Windows Xp still.
    Updates are not the only security issue with Android and it is incredibly naive to suggest otherwise, as is the case with any operating sytem whether mobile or not. Examples include the ease of sideloading unsigned apps and the allowance of in-app advertising.

    Is that clear enough for you?
    06-03-2016 04:45 AM
  18. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    Updates are not the only security issue with Android and it is incredibly naive to suggest otherwise, as is the case with any operating sytem whether mobile or not. Examples include the ease of sideloading unsigned apps and the allowance of in-app advertising.

    Is that clear enough for you?
    So in other words because someone can side load apps an OS is insecure? So that means that Windows on PC is the most insecure OS in the world because you can download and install anything on it.

    When we talk about security of an OS it's typically about how easily it's hacked by others. In this instance the latest Android OS is secure and updates are very very important to security and vulnerability of the OS. To suggest otherwise is to be highly naive.

    You cannot prevent user stupidity however hard you try, as an industrial engineer I try to reduce this in principle in my designs but it's impossible to eliminate. Same goes for software or hardware.

    Talk to any IT security person and they'll tell you the biggest threat to IT security is users.

    For those who like a bit of paranoia to go with their security worries should check this site out - Norse
    Last edited by a5cent; 06-03-2016 at 07:39 AM. Reason: removed what could be viewed as a personal attack
    06-03-2016 04:58 AM
  19. a5cent's Avatar
    So in other words because someone can side load apps an OS is insecure? So that means that Windows on PC is the most insecure OS in the world because you can download and install anything on it.
    Exactly, that's one of the main things that makes an OS insecure, or more precisely:


    • the ability to easily tamper with software while there being no sign that such software has been tampered with
    • the fact that OSes like Windows or Linux know nothing of the concept of an app (it's just a bunch of files the installer barfs onto your system which can include anything and be written anywhere.
    • etc

    The ability to install anything is just the final step that breaks the security camel's back, due to all the other security flaws (or complete lack of security concepts in those areas) that exist along side it.

    And yes, Windows is the least secure OS for precisely this reason (not because it's most often targeted). This is in fact exactly the reason the modern Windows run time environment exists in the first place. It exists primarily because it was impossible for MS to change Win32 into a more secure system (which is better at protecting users from themselves) without severely compromising compatibility, which is why we got the "tacked on" WinRT rather than an evolved and more secure Win32!

    You cannot prevent user stupidity however hard you try, as an industrial engineer I try to reduce this in principle in my designs but it's impossible to eliminate. Same goes for software or hardware.
    Windows was originally designed for technically minded people. Anybody who used such a system was a professional and knew one or two things about the tech they were using. That's completely different today.

    It's true that an OS can't foresee and deal with every form of user stupidity. Users will always have to carry some of that responsibility for the reasons you mentioned. However, a modern consumer OS must strive to make it as easy as possible to be used securely and as difficult as possible to be used insecurely. Neither Windows or Linux Desktops fit that description. Those systems are better suited to being used in any which way a user desires, which may or may not be secure. Those systems make users responsible for a lot more than is technically necessary, and very few consumers are competent enough to make secure choices.

    That is very much in contrast to iOS or the modern Windows run-time environment. Android is somewhere in between.

    When we talk about security of an OS it's typically about how easily it's hacked by others.
    I completely disagree with this. It's probably only true in non-technical consumer oriented discussions, likely because such exploits are scarier and far more spectacular, but they account for less than 1% of all successful security breaches. In professional circles the main topics discussed are exactly the opposite. A Windows admin spends a big part of their education studying how to lock down a Windows client with the goal of making it less maintenance intensive and more secure, almost all of which is focused on preventing users from doing things they shouldn't!

    When it comes to resisting remote hacks, almost all OSes are rather secure these days (with OSX occasionally offering an exception).

    The larger and far more important aspect of security, because that is what is exploited 99% of the time, is how easy it is for users to screw up (out of stupidity, ignorance, or whatever reason). In that regard the various consumer OSes are very different.

    We agree on most things here, but I don't think it's correct to suggest that side loading (not by itself, but along all the other security failures that factor in to that scenario) isn't part of the security puzzle. Those things can't be ignored. Any judgement of OS security must encompass all aspects of security, including those that stem from user stupidity, many of which are easily avoidable given a more cleverly designed OS. Apple's iOS and MS' modern Windows run-time have attempted to do exactly that. It's in fact a large part of Apple's success and their no-hassle, no-fuss, it-just-works image.
    Last edited by a5cent; 06-05-2016 at 05:05 AM. Reason: spelling
    06-03-2016 07:35 AM
  20. falconrap's Avatar
    I work for one of the largest corporations in the world. We will begin migration to Windows 10 in a couple of months. One of the biggest reasons holding a number of companies back had been some key applications that most companies have to use for security and/or compliance. A couple of real big ones finally out out Windows 10 compatible versions in the past couple of months, so now we're in final stages of testing.

    Windows 10 has a number of big advantages for companies that aren't short sighted. The ability to package corporate apps on a company store, and providing access to only those apps the company wants you to have access to via a curated list is one of the big ones. They can prevent you from installing most apps while allowing approved store apps to be installed as needed. It also allows easier to maintain corporate images. In the next 6 months you can expect to see quite a few big names migrate over.

    Yes, there will always be those IT departments lead by people who lack vision. But don't underestimate the advantages Windows 10 has and how many people have the vision to take advantage of it.
    Laura Knotek and TgeekB like this.
    06-03-2016 07:39 AM
  21. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    I work for one of the largest corporations in the world. We will begin migration to Windows 10 in a couple of months. One of the biggest reasons holding a number of companies back had been some key applications that most companies have to use for security and/or compliance. A couple of real big ones finally out out Windows 10 compatible versions in the past couple of months, so now we're in final stages of testing.

    Windows 10 has a number of big advantages for companies that aren't short sighted. The ability to package corporate apps on a company store, and providing access to only those apps the company wants you to have access to via a curated list is one of the big ones. They can prevent you from installing most apps while allowing approved store apps to be installed as needed. It also allows easier to maintain corporate images. In the next 6 months you can expect to see quite a few big names migrate over.

    Yes, there will always be those IT departments lead by people who lack vision. But don't underestimate the advantages Windows 10 has and how many people have the vision to take advantage of it.
    I think for a lot of companies it will be the cost of upgrading since a lot of them just recently upgraded to Windows 7. Trying to convince upper management that they should move to Windows 10 won't be easy.

    When I say cost, I mean the overall cost, not the OS. When you have thousands of people using PCs it's a lot of money and time.

    I pointed out I'm using pretty old software as it is, then on top of that old PCs as well. Then there's the issue of specialist software that we use and compatibility. Lots of testing would be involved.
    06-03-2016 08:15 AM
  22. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    Exactly, that's one of the main things that makes an OS insecure, or more precisely:


    • the ability to easily tamper with software while there being no sign that such software has been tampered with
    • the fact that OSes like Windows or Linux know nothing of the concept of an app (it's just a bunch of files the installer barfs onto your system which can include anything and be written anywhere.
    • etc

    The ability to install anything is just the final step that breaks the security camel's back, due to all the other security flaws (or complete lack of security concepts in those areas) that exist along side it.

    And yes, Windows is the least secure OS for precisely this reason (not because it's most often targeted). This is in fact exactly the reason the modern Windows run time environment exists in the first place. It exists primarily because it was impossible for MS to change Win32 into a more secure system (which is better at protecting users from themselves) without severely compromising compatibility, which is why we got the "tacked on" WinRT rather than an evolved and more secure Win32!



    Windows was originally designed for technically minded people. Anybody who used such a system was a professional and knew one or two things about the tech they were using. That's completely different today.

    It's true that an OS can't foresee and deal with every form of user stupidity. Users will always have to carry some of that responsibility for the reasons you mentioned. However, a modern consumer OS must strive to make it as easy as possible to be used securely and as difficult as possible to be used insecurely. Neither Windows or Linux fit that description. Those systems are better suited to being used in any which way a user desires, which may or not be secure. Those systems make users responsible for a lot more than is technically necessary, and very few consumers are competent enough to make secure choices.

    That is very much in contrast to iOS or the modern Windows run-time environment. Android is somewhere in between.



    I completely disagree with this. It's probably only true in non-technical consumer oriented discussions, likely because such exploits are scarier and far more spectacular, but they account for less than 1% of all successful security breaches. In professional circles the main topics discussed are exactly the opposite. A Windows admin spends a big part of their education studying how to lock down a Windows client with the goal of making it less maintenance intensive and more secure, almost all of which is focused on preventing users from doing things they shouldn't!

    When it comes to resisting remote hacks, almost all OSes are rather secure these days (with OSX occasionally offering an exception).

    The larger and far more important aspect of security, because that is what is exploited 99% of the time, is how easy it is for users to screw up (out of stupidity, ignorance, or whatever reason). In that regard the various consumer OSes are very different.

    We agree on most things here, but I don't think it's correct to suggest that side loading (not by itself, but along all the other security failures that factor in to that scenario) isn't part of the security puzzle. Those things can't be ignored. Any judgement of OS security must encompass all aspects of security, including those that stem from user stupidity, many of which are easily avoidable given a more cleverly designed OS. Apple's iOS and MS modern Windows run-time have attempted to do exactly that. It's in fact a large part of Apple's success and their no-hassle, no-fuss, it-just-works image.
    I won't disagree with anything you say. Not only because you're right, but also because I didn't think things through myself.

    Ah to have simpler IT issues...
    06-03-2016 08:17 AM
  23. cracgor's Avatar
    I have been perusing the boards, and indeed the comments thread, and there still seems to be a persistent 'hatred' / 'dislike' of whatever MS is offering.
    My opinion is that the perceived "hatred" of W10M is in fact disappointment in something people love. This is then coupled with differing opinions with the bloggers on this site. While I will give it to the writers for being passionate and thorough in their thought processes, I still often disagree with the talking points articles. When I read phrases like "retrenchment" , "UWP", "continuum", "WaaS", or "leverage enterprise"; I feel like it is the same story year after year. It is not persistent hatred to think that:

    1) Retrenchment means backing away from the market and saying that declining sales and interest is intentional.
    2) Continuum is a neat gimmick that is not quite useful enough to be of real use at the moment.
    3) UWP is not likely to work because developers have been tricked 3 times with OS reboots and the number of useful W10 devices are not there. 300 million desktops running W10 will not convince a developer to write an app for the mobile environment.
    4) WaaS is more of an excuse to say that incomplete software is being released for the consumer to beta test and pay a monthly subscription.
    5) Enterprise in mobile has been ceded to Apple a long time ago. Windows does have leverage with computing, but right now the two are separate.

    I have been reading these articles since WP7 and was a believer in everything I read all the way up to W10M, but nothing ever happened. Just more of the same. So while you are entitled to your opinions that everything will turn around this time for W10M and it will be around forever; I disagree. I would love to have a W10M device, but until the OS is stable, the hardware is compelling, and the app situation is fixed, I will be on the sidelines.

    I could be wrong. Everything could turn around. Part of the purpose of an internet forum is to provide debate. Just because you are on WindowsCentral, does not mean you have to agree with everything Microsoft does.
    06-03-2016 09:40 AM
  24. FirstWatt's Avatar
    [...]
    2) Continuum is a neat gimmick that is not quite useful enough to be of real use at the moment.
    [..]
    Everything which became successful was "not quite useful at the moment", at some point in the past.

    Apart that, I disagree completely. I have a great opportunity exactly now, for continuum...
    Our IT blocked everything "Web Mail", that is GMail, Outlook.com, whatever, and they block all Cloud File Services. OK, I can have a look at the incoming private Mails on my mobile. But answering them, especially if it's a longer mail, or if I have to copy content from other programs into it, is a PITA.
    So, Continuum comes to the rescue. Plug the adaptor cable in the monitor of my PC at work, get the BT Keyboard in the drawer, and work with my private mail, surf the sites our IT is blocking (no they not only block what you think ;) ), and so forth.

    Uh, I forgot: I'm not working in a Bank. They have, at least in Switzerland, shut down everything already. Almost no internet, no USB Stick, no nothing.

    Continuum is great already.
    Felipeicd likes this.
    06-03-2016 10:00 AM
  25. Felipeicd's Avatar
    I think that the problem with w10m was the 950 and that not all wp8.1 phones could be updated, when w10m was released with the 950 the os was full of bugs and the phone didn't feel like a flagship phone. It has take some time the the phone and os work fine, now I think it work great. I do like what windows it's trying to do now, creating a universal core, so I have a surface a xbox one and a 950xl, but still, you can see why people don't trust what microsoft want to do, there has been years of pour marketing and general problem in the windows mobile world and the eternal "soon" from microsoft.

    Enviado desde mTalk
    Dante X likes this.
    06-03-2016 10:09 AM
106 1234 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-29-2016, 03:42 PM
  2. OneLocker, the feature-rich password vault, receives a Windows 10 tune-up
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-31-2016, 08:11 AM
  3. The new Dell Inspiron 7000 series sports the world's first 17-inch 2-in-1 laptop
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-31-2016, 05:30 AM
  4. Funker reportedly set to launch the W6.0 Pro 2 with Continuum
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-31-2016, 03:42 AM
  5. Samsung's 512GB NVMe SSD weighs just one gram, is about the size of a coin
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-31-2016, 01:20 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD