I think it's time for me to let go.

[onysi]

I still use it, and I've been a loyal user since wp7. I waited for this shift from Windows mobile 5-6.5 right when iphone 1 and android g1 was starting. I've stuck out with this smart phone for so long, even after getting a second [android] phone two years ago (for Snapchat, social apps, home security cameras), I didn't let Windows mobile go. It's still a very reliable phone and text and everything that microsoft is keeping it alive for like outlook, onedrive, office services. But now those are all on android now. As of late, the most basic social media like facebook n instagram have started erroring out on me. I can't send or upload photos thru messenger or insta becuase of app errors. I have to "email" photos just to send to friends. It's getting harder to find ways to fwd files besides email theirs really no other ways.

Now all this talk about Andromeda coming to 2018 and were half way thru the year and still nothing. All the articles about foldable pc, etc, etc.. Maybe that can just be another option down the road if it ever comes out but I think it's time for me to leave winmo10. Micriosoft has completely abandoned me. I've stuck with the phone for so long, and I've forgotten what its like to own a "flagship" phone. It's sad I have to make this post buy im sure some of you loyal folks have stayed this long too.

 

[Tahir Malik]

I went to the Nokia 8 a while ago and I do miss my Lumia 950 XL, but I don't regret it.

Expect the camera quality I'm quite satisfied with the move I made. When the Andromedia device will be out, I'll be sure to switch back .

Good luck on your decision making.

 

[onysi]

That's a great choice. Im gearing towards blackberry android devices. I need that physical keyboard lol. Something I cannot get tired of.

 

[mggm100]

I made the switch about a month ago, and at this point I'm glad I did. I went from 950 XL to Pixel 2. The 950 XL always seemed uncomfortably large to me, so I went with the regular Pixel 2, and I'm happy with its size. I always loved the Bing daily images on my 950 XL, so I installed the Microsoft Launcher for Android in order to keep getting them on the Pixel 2. That's one thing I'm glad I didn't have to give up. And frankly, I don't miss the Live Tiles as much as I thought I would. The Pixel is fun to use. Android has become a lot more appealing since I last used it back before my Lumia 1020. Overall it has been a good experience.

Good luck with your switch. Let's hope its a good experience for you too.

 

[Drael646464]

Well you are right in that MSFT caters more atm for android and iPhone. I mean a lot of the features they are now getting, windows mobile has had for ages, but still, they definately get more love. They will for example receive timeline via the Microsoft launcher on android, which windows mobile will most likely never.


However, I note that windows mobile like all OSes can get a bit buggy over time (and more WM, lol). You might want to try a backup of everything via the settings, and a hard reset before you conclude that all your apps are fragged.


Personally my phone works good still. I'm not a buy a new device just because I like the short three week yay guy. But if you can't make it work, go for it. If you are very selective about apps and launchers etc, you can avoid google and ads on android. And get a good microsofty experience. And if your into casual gaming, the iPhone is pretty good for that.

I went android, and then in an usual move, went to blackberry and then windows mobile. I found to UI on android quite jumbled, and the software mostly hot air. Finding the good stuff is even more of an art than navigating the windows store- although typically if you pay upfront, it's better.

I'd seriously consider the blackberry androids if I had to move (which I don't), because once you get used to those physical keyboards they are an absolute joy next to swiping. If familiar enough, you can type one handed like a machine.

As far as photo's go - between your own windows machines there is "hand off", to for other people there is WhatsApp and viber - everyone pretty much has both. But go ahead and buy a another phone if you are suffering for it. Xiaomi have some great phones if your on a budget - high teir for low price. Interesting side story there - they make their money from web services in china. So the phone side is basically zero profit. Hence why they are such a value proposition.

 

[jolyrojr]

As of late, the most basic social media like facebook n instagram have started erroring out on me. I can't send or upload photos thru messenger or insta becuase of app errors. I have to "email" photos just to send to friends. It's getting harder to find ways to fwd files besides email theirs really no other ways.

microsoft hasn't abandoned us, in fact, they reengineered windows and xbox in order to put us all on one platform so we dont get left behind even though our marketshare is crap, because mobile is a full part of windows 10. the slow down in development comes from working on a platform that works on both pc cpu's and phone cpu's. no body else does that. nobody else has to work to make sure their code works on a billion different hardware configurations, so yeah they dont get as much done.

the Instagram/facebook apps arent great, but facebook doesnt invest money on platforms that prevent their data scraping. so of course their android app will get more attention, it steals more data for them which is why facebook is free.

we dont have snapchat at all, and i feel that is either a conspiracy or maybe snap realizes that windows phone does poorly with the 12-16 demographic, and 99% snap users are kids sending each other home made child porn, so who really needs that garbage on the platform? most legitimate snapchat user, aka the few people not using it for porn, moved to Instagram cause it does the same thing but without the secrecy.

 

[Ryujingt3]

I think Andromeda is just a pipe dream. When it does get released (rushed, of course), everyone will automatically compare it to W10M so it will immediately be a failure. MS never seem to learn from their mistakes and the consumers always get given the blame.

 

[Drael646464]

I think Andromeda is just a pipe dream. When it does get released (rushed, of course), everyone will automatically compare it to W10M so it will immediately be a failure. MS never seem to learn from their mistakes and the consumers always get given the blame.

Hardly seems like they have been rushing windows core with cshell, or for that matter windows on arm emulation. Seems rather like they are treating all that better than they have been windows 10 or any of their other products. The former has been in the pipeline for 5+ years. The later has been in the pipeline for 3 years.

Andromeda itself has revised patents running back longer than 3 years.

 

[Ryujingt3]

Hardly seems like they have been rushing windows core with cshell, or for that matter windows on arm emulation. Seems rather like they are treating all that better than they have been windows 10 or any of their other products. The former has been in the pipeline for 5+ years. The later has been in the pipeline for 3 years.

Andromeda itself has revised patents running back longer than 3 years.

But it doesn't matter what MS call this, Andromeda, WP10.1M, they will always have the stigma and burden associated with the failure of WP, W10M etc.. Consumers are fickle. If they can't get their same iOS or Android apps or experience on this new piece of hardware then it has already failed to them. MS never seem to learn. If Andromeda is launched it'll be in the same limited territories with the same limited apps and region specific features (e.g. still no Snapchat) and the same excuses. That leads, ultimately, to the same failure, retrenching, rebranding etc. Expect Andromeda 2.1 in 2023.

 

[Drael646464]

But it doesn't matter what MS call this, Andromeda, WP10.1M, they will always have the stigma and burden associated with the failure of WP, W10M etc.. Consumers are fickle. If they can't get their same iOS or Android apps or experience on this new piece of hardware then it has already failed to them. MS never seem to learn. If Andromeda is launched it'll be in the same limited territories with the same limited apps and region specific features (e.g. still no Snapchat) and the same excuses. That leads, ultimately, to the same failure, retrenching, rebranding etc. Expect Andromeda 2.1 in 2023.

I really don't feel like the majority of consumers have heard of windows phone, or windows mobile. I'd say the majority of them don't even know what android is. That's a very tech user, tech review centric type of point of view.

Maybe the tech media might have some influence on "on the fence" potential purchasers.

Realistically the only issue is that they are unfamiliar as a brand name in the mobile device space. But the surface brand helps with that a bit.

But Andromeda, from what I can tell, isn't for tech enthusiasts or mainstream users. It seems to be for a very particular use case - users who take quick notes or drawings, like media, creatives, people in meetings, perhaps some students. It seems like a niche device (stylus driven pocket input), and given it has no direct competition (there are no devices that provide the same features), I think it more likely its slow success or slow failure will depend on how well conceived it is.

It seems especially unlikely that the presence or absence of snapchat would have any major influence, given that used almost exclusively by teenagers who wouldn't even have the money for such a device, let alone a use case.


I think too, you misunderstand the purpose of introducing a product like this now. The long term purpose is to have a platform prep for the eventual move to graphene screens. That tech won't be affordable for enterprise for a decade. Consumers is probably 15 years off.

MSFT by releasing designs like this now, is really trying to get it, so that windows core as a platform is really for AR, and folding tablets, later, when the tech has matured and gotten cheaper. It doesn't actually matter if its a wild success or not. It only matters if they garner some platform refinement and some developer base, before the competition has even started any work on it.

It's a little like, as analogy, if someone was trying to start an smartphone OS and app platform before the release of the iPhone, because they could see it coming. So that the day the iPhone was released, they could release a similar device with a more mature OS and app platform.

For that, they don't need to even make money. They just need to have some limited interest from purchasers and developers. That makes andromeda, really far more similar to "HoloLens" than it does to windows mobile. More like a sort of device beta, a testing and developing platform, and a product for a niche group of primarily wealthy enterprise and creative users.

 

[Ryujingt3]

I really don't feel like the majority of consumers have heard of windows phone, or windows mobile. I'd say the majority of them don't even know what android is. That's a very tech user, tech review centric type of point of view.

Maybe the tech media might have some influence on "on the fence" potential purchasers.

Realistically the only issue is that they are unfamiliar as a brand name in the mobile device space. But the surface brand helps with that a bit.

But Andromeda, from what I can tell, isn't for tech enthusiasts or mainstream users. It seems to be for a very particular use case - users who take quick notes or drawings, like media, creatives, people in meetings, perhaps some students. It seems like a niche device (stylus driven pocket input), and given it has no direct competition (there are no devices that provide the same features), I think it more likely its slow success or slow failure will depend on how well conceived it is.

It seems especially unlikely that the presence or absence of snapchat would have any major influence, given that used almost exclusively by teenagers who wouldn't even have the money for such a device, let alone a use case.


I think too, you misunderstand the purpose of introducing a product like this now. The long term purpose is to have a platform prep for the eventual move to graphene screens. That tech won't be affordable for enterprise for a decade. Consumers is probably 15 years off.

MSFT by releasing designs like this now, is really trying to get it, so that windows core as a platform is really for AR, and folding tablets, later, when the tech has matured and gotten cheaper. It doesn't actually matter if its a wild success or not. It only matters if they garner some platform refinement and some developer base, before the competition has even started any work on it.

It's a little like, as analogy, if someone was trying to start an smartphone OS and app platform before the release of the iPhone, because they could see it coming. So that the day the iPhone was released, they could release a similar device with a more mature OS and app platform.

For that, they don't need to even make money. They just need to have some limited interest from purchasers and developers. That makes andromeda, really far more similar to "HoloLens" than it does to windows mobile. More like a sort of device beta, a testing and developing platform, and a product for a niche group of primarily wealthy enterprise and creative users.

I think you are right, I probably don't know the purpose of introducing this product, lots others don't either, as you said, and maybe we are all wrong and this isn't the Windows Phone messiah that we are all hoping it to be.

Not having Snapchat was just an example, Pokemon Go is another. Basically, without mainstream apps, apps that anyone can get on Android and iPhone consumers simply won't switch to another platform. That's the biggest obstacle MS will face and it's their biggest enemy.

Consumers are narrow-minded. They only think of what they know. So tech like this may also be met with resistance. Look at the launch of the Nintendo DS, everyone laughed, then it conquered the world.

I really want MS to succeed, but, like others, I've had to move on because I've been burnt too many times and I believed the same promises again and again. When MS fans realise Andromeda is not going to be what they thought they they too will have to switch, meaning that MS, ultimately, has silently conceded defeat.

 

[Drael646464]

I think you are right, I probably don't know the purpose of introducing this product, lots others don't either, as you said, and maybe we are all wrong and this isn't the Windows Phone messiah that we are all hoping it to be.

Not having Snapchat was just an example, Pokemon Go is another. Basically, without mainstream apps, apps that anyone can get on Android and iPhone consumers simply won't switch to another platform. That's the biggest obstacle MS will face and it's their biggest enemy.

Consumers are narrow-minded. They only think of what they know. So tech like this may also be met with resistance. Look at the launch of the Nintendo DS, everyone laughed, then it conquered the world.

I really want MS to succeed, but, like others, I've had to move on because I've been burnt too many times and I believed the same promises again and again. When MS fans realise Andromeda is not going to be what they thought they they too will have to switch, meaning that MS, ultimately, has silently conceded defeat.

I think PWA will really solve that. PWA apps over 5G really makes the vast majority of lightweight platform specific apps redundant.

I think google has a similar thing in mind, I think when they switch to their hybrid OS in development, fuschia, they will want to entirely ditch the Linux base and the majority of the android ecosystem.


But there is no place in my mind that things the first gen of andromeda is a consumer product designed to lure over typical smartphone consumers. It's got a crease in the middle of the screen - albiet one that is visually minimized, but that's a serious obstacle to mainstream adoption. Only graphene tech, that's way too expensive even for enterprise will solve that.


Basically it looks something like this:



The intended primary use pattern is something like multi-tasking, or apps with two sided UIs, with an emphasis on the pen. That's a specific userbase.

The purpose of such a device, isn't to rule the smartphone market at all, or even to carve out a niche, but to perfect the scalable, adaptable OS and app platform, prior to the arrival of the graphene screen that will make smartphone OSes, apps redundant and an ill fit.

Smartphones have passed adoption in the west. The profits from them will soon fall rapidly, and purchasing is already switching to price point competition.


When graphene screens arrive, users will want a scaleable OS that is designed and perfected for switching between single screen, and dual screen - and apps that do the same. They'll also want more feature rich software than is typical for smartphones, because the use pattern will more resemble the use of a surface pro, or an ipad at home - long, detailed activities, rather than brief, continual use like a smartphone. That will therefore demand more of a feature rich application ecosystem, more closely resembling that of a surface pro, or an ipad, than an android phone.

The android app ecosystem or UI will not do for example.

In short, this smartphone is only a battle. It is not the war. The war is what MSFT is focused on. That's why it's conceding the battle.

The war consists over several areas - AR, folding screen tech, VR, AI, and cloud distributed computing. The hybrid OS strategy obviously plays into increased device diversity and ubiqitious computing as well.

Winning the battle isn't nessasary for winning the war. There are several others ways it could be won. Heck, even amazon is in the race in it's way - IoT, AI, and servers are hardly minor plays in the long game, even though its well behind in the other areas. I'm quite pleased Microsoft has partnerships with Amazon, Steam and Samsung. Collectively they'll make quite a force.

 

[Ryujingt3]

I think PWA will really solve that. PWA apps over 5G really makes the vast majority of lightweight platform specific apps redundant.

I think google has a similar thing in mind, I think when they switch to their hybrid OS in development, fuschia, they will want to entirely ditch the Linux base and the majority of the android ecosystem.


But there is no place in my mind that things the first gen of andromeda is a consumer product designed to lure over typical smartphone consumers. It's got a crease in the middle of the screen - albiet one that is visually minimized, but that's a serious obstacle to mainstream adoption. Only graphene tech, that's way too expensive even for enterprise will solve that.


Basically it looks something like this:

View attachment 139353

The intended primary use pattern is something like multi-tasking, or apps with two sided UIs, with an emphasis on the pen. That's a specific userbase.

The purpose of such a device, isn't to rule the smartphone market at all, or even to carve out a niche, but to perfect the scalable, adaptable OS and app platform, prior to the arrival of the graphene screen that will make smartphone OSes, apps redundant and an ill fit.

Smartphones have passed adoption in the west. The profits from them will soon fall rapidly, and purchasing is already switching to price point competition.


When graphene screens arrive, users will want a scaleable OS that is designed and perfected for switching between single screen, and dual screen - and apps that do the same. They'll also want more feature rich software than is typical for smartphones, because the use pattern will more resemble the use of a surface pro, or an ipad at home - long, detailed activities, rather than brief, continual use like a smartphone. That will therefore demand more of a feature rich application ecosystem, more closely resembling that of a surface pro, or an ipad, than an android phone.

The android app ecosystem or UI will not do for example.

In short, this smartphone is only a battle. It is not the war. The war is what MSFT is focused on. That's why it's conceding the battle.

The war consists over several areas - AR, folding screen tech, VR, AI, and cloud distributed computing. The hybrid OS strategy obviously plays into increased device diversity and ubiqitious computing as well.

Winning the battle isn't nessasary for winning the war. There are several others ways it could be won. Heck, even amazon is in the race in it's way - IoT, AI, and servers are hardly minor plays in the long game, even though its well behind in the other areas. I'm quite pleased Microsoft has partnerships with Amazon, Steam and Samsung. Collectively they'll make quite a force.

This all sounds very good and everything, and it would be nice to have one device that could run everything. But as we have seen, MS can make great products, and have great tech, but sadly it's only when Samsung or Apple do the same thing (or near enough, with a slight modification) that the masses will suddenly adopt it.

 

[Drael646464]

This all sounds very good and everything, and it would be nice to have one device that could run everything. But as we have seen, MS can make great products, and have great tech, but sadly it's only when Samsung or Apple do the same thing (or near enough, with a slight modification) that the masses will suddenly adopt it.

No one is going to mass adopt such a device any time in the next decade. That's not what this is for, it's to mature a product so much, that it is ahead of any ability to catch up, by the time the technology is ready. Much like the HoloLens. It's a leapfrog strategy.

The analogy I've been using recently is imagine if before the iPhone, someone spent a solild ten years developing an ecosystem and OS for that type of device on proto devices. Then when the iPhone arrives, it's inferior in every way.

That's what MSFT is trying to do in several areas. AR, VR and folding ultramobiles in particular.

Samsung actually co-developed the graphene OLED screen technology patent with Microsoft under balmer, and I think it likely they will create windows devices when the time is right for a mass consumer market. There has been serious antagonism between Samsung and google, and they have repeatedly said they don't like being tied to android.

And Samsung does make windows devices currently too. If the software were mature, I see no reason why they wouldn't be on board. Indeed, I don't know the legal technicalities, but as co-owners of the patent, it might be possible they both require each others permission to use that screen technology. Making a strong partnership on the devices inevitable. If that's the case, being Samsung is the dominant name in smartphones, the question might be more a matter of how does Google get in on that action....

That said, I think Google has a better competitor than apple does. ChromeOS. With it's incoming Linux emulation layer, and existing android runtime, touch and stylus support, it could potentially catch up to where MSFT is with a hybrid OS by the time we get to the point of graphene. Apple refuses to fuse iOS and OSX, and their OSX isn't touch or stylus friendly.

So when it gets to that point, it looks more likely at this point that it will be Google and Microsoft, and Saumsung. With Samsung and other OEMs making convergence devices for both Chrome (or fuschia if it replaces it), and Windows core (on arm). MSFT isn't a hardware company and nor is google.

The other thing in MSFTs corner is that as profit underdogs to google and apple, they have collected some solid partnerships - Amazon, Samsung, Steam. Steam helps significantly with VR, Amazon with IoT and Samsung with any hopes of a ultramobile PC.

I don't know what the heck Apple is even going to do, when it's iPhone sales drop off post-adoption phase. When developing markets like India dry up, something like five years down the track, and all the novelty has worn off, I think their current business model is going to struggle. They need to innovate, and quick. They certainly won't be top tech dog for much longer.

I'd like to see them innovate. Release something not just imitative, but ahead of the pack. But I am losing faith fast.

Re: google, I think they'll be ditching android in the tablet space, and focusing on ChromeOS. Indeed I think they'll be fighting in that exact same hybrid tablet space that windows on arm is. It's the fastest growing space in PCs hybrids, and this light, ultramobile angle will just increase that.

This will position them, alongside MSFT in the folding tablet market too later on.

In fact I wonder if google has any intent of keeping going with android long term at all. Seems like they want either chrome or fuschia, or both to replace it. There's something about their promotion of PWA, their exploration of other OSes, their fight for chromeOS, the gambit to get windows 10 certification for the pixel, that just smells to me like they have reasons to ditch android altogether. I don't know enough detail about their issues with the OS, but it just feels that way somehow.

But I just don't think Android will ever get to "Z". Indeed I suspect Google has much the same vision of convergence MSFT does, and thus see Android as just a device specific and eventually outmoded model.

 

[Ryujingt3]

No one is going to mass adopt such a device any time in the next decade. That's not what this is for, it's to mature a product so much, that it is ahead of any ability to catch up, by the time the technology is ready. Much like the HoloLens. It's a leapfrog strategy.

The analogy I've been using recently is imagine if before the iPhone, someone spent a solild ten years developing an ecosystem and OS for that type of device on proto devices. Then when the iPhone arrives, it's inferior in every way.

That's what MSFT is trying to do in several areas. AR, VR and folding ultramobiles in particular.

Samsung actually co-developed the graphene OLED screen technology patent with Microsoft under balmer, and I think it likely they will create windows devices when the time is right for a mass consumer market. There has been serious antagonism between Samsung and google, and they have repeatedly said they don't like being tied to android.

And Samsung does make windows devices currently too. If the software were mature, I see no reason why they wouldn't be on board. Indeed, I don't know the legal technicalities, but as co-owners of the patent, it might be possible they both require each others permission to use that screen technology. Making a strong partnership on the devices inevitable. If that's the case, being Samsung is the dominant name in smartphones, the question might be more a matter of how does Google get in on that action....

That said, I think Google has a better competitor than apple does. ChromeOS. With it's incoming Linux emulation layer, and existing android runtime, touch and stylus support, it could potentially catch up to where MSFT is with a hybrid OS by the time we get to the point of graphene. Apple refuses to fuse iOS and OSX, and their OSX isn't touch or stylus friendly.

So when it gets to that point, it looks more likely at this point that it will be Google and Microsoft, and Saumsung. With Samsung and other OEMs making convergence devices for both Chrome (or fuschia if it replaces it), and Windows core (on arm). MSFT isn't a hardware company and nor is google.

The other thing in MSFTs corner is that as profit underdogs to google and apple, they have collected some solid partnerships - Amazon, Samsung, Steam. Steam helps significantly with VR, Amazon with IoT and Samsung with any hopes of a ultramobile PC.

I don't know what the heck Apple is even going to do, when it's iPhone sales drop off post-adoption phase. When developing markets like India dry up, something like five years down the track, and all the novelty has worn off, I think their current business model is going to struggle. They need to innovate, and quick. They certainly won't be top tech dog for much longer.

I'd like to see them innovate. Release something not just imitative, but ahead of the pack. But I am losing faith fast.

Re: google, I think they'll be ditching android in the tablet space, and focusing on ChromeOS. Indeed I think they'll be fighting in that exact same hybrid tablet space that windows on arm is. It's the fastest growing space in PCs hybrids, and this light, ultramobile angle will just increase that.

This will position them, alongside MSFT in the folding tablet market too later on.

In fact I wonder if google has any intent of keeping going with android long term at all. Seems like they want either chrome or fuschia, or both to replace it. There's something about their promotion of PWA, their exploration of other OSes, their fight for chromeOS, the gambit to get windows 10 certification for the pixel, that just smells to me like they have reasons to ditch android altogether. I don't know enough detail about their issues with the OS, but it just feels that way somehow.

But I just don't think Android will ever get to "Z". Indeed I suspect Google has much the same vision of convergence MSFT does, and thus see Android as just a device specific and eventually outmoded model.

It does seem that convergence is the next step and that Google, Apple and MS are all trying to get there. Most likely though, MS will definitely get there first but too early so it won't be adopted, Apple will perfect it and the masses will love it, and Google will simply copy Apple, leaving MS, ultimately, out in the cold.

 

[Drael646464]

It does seem that convergence is the next step and that Google, Apple and MS are all trying to get there. Most likely though, MS will definitely get there first but too early so it won't be adopted, Apple will perfect it and the masses will love it, and Google will simply copy Apple, leaving MS, ultimately, out in the cold.

That's the thing though, last WWDC, Apple definitively told it's audience it would not merge iOS and OSX. OSX has iOS app support now, but it's not designed for touch or stylus, and apple has never made a device that supports those. Apple appears to be making zero effort in that direction.


Google on the other hand has touch support and stylus support on ChromeOS, android and chrome app support and Linux coming. Google also has it's seperate Fushia Hybrid desktop and mobile OS. MSFT has it's UWP platform and not simply a hybrid style OS in beta, but a full hybrid OS via windows core. And it's not just designed for mobile and PC either, it's also designed for IoT, and AR/VR.

I don't think there is anyway Apple could possibly catch up.

By the time MSFT gets to the adoption phase it will have A) an OS that is fully fined tuned and perfected and B) an app ecosystem that is fully fleshed out. A hybrid OS is something like a five year project. And building up a decent app system ontop of that takes years as well.

Plus not only given the size of such and endeavour would MSFT and perhaps google be far too far ahead, but then theirs also the issue of Samsung and Microsofts co-owned screen patent. I don't know the technicalities, but it's possible that Samsung or MSFT cannot use this technology without the partners permission. If that's the case, the leading smartphone manufacturer in the world in terms of userbase and unit's sold would be making microsoft's machine.

The issue is that making a hybrid OS, and filling it with an ecosystem and then competing with that product in a market with properly mature and evolved versions, isn't as easy as slapping a few technologies together and selling an iPhone, in a market with no real competition. It's less comparable to making a smartphone, and more comparable to making a desktop OS in the 80s and 90s with an application platform - there's so much work involved, that if you are ahead, the competition will never catch up.

Looking at Apple these days, it's lack of apparent innovation in recent years, and it's profit dependence on a soon be plummeting market, premium smartphones - I'm not actually too sure Apple will even be a household name in ten to fifteen years. At least any more than nokia was. I know that might sound harsh, but literally most of their cash comes from a product that's entering post-adoption, particularly in the west. A product that is about to have a dramatic shift away from the premium market, to price point competition.

I have more faith that Google seems to know what it's doing, it's most certainly positioning ChromeOS to replace Android on tablets right now, and compete directly against Windows on ARM probably on the same OEM devices with the same chipsets.

Indeed, even when it comes to THAT market, I feel like apple will be left out in the cold. Hybrids are not only the fastest growing segment of tablets, but the fastest growing segment of PCs as of this year.

iPad sales have been drifting downward for several years, and the iPad pro is their least performing product (like it genuinely sells really badly next to the regularly ipad). The tablet market overall has been shrinking, whilst the hybrid market has been rapidly growing - and apples only offering, the ipad pro, just hasn't been up to muster.

When you put that next to ChromeOS and Windows on ARM - both capable of running full desktop software, both optimised for both touch and mouse and keyboard, both running most likely on always connected light snapdragon designs - basically the sort of computer that could almost entirely replace the desktop as a basic consumer device (ie they are ultramobile, can operate as a tablet, a laptop, and a full desktop workstation)- both with a full market of OEMs, I think the ipad could swiftly die. Like really swiftly.


And all this in mind, I'd need to see some last minute surprise innovation and out of the box thinking before I'd consider apple to even be in the game. At minimum, some kind of AR device, or a move to make OSX touch friendly. The biggest capital apple has in the market right now is branding. And that branding is primarily with millenials and teenagers - millenials ten years down the track won't be particularly trend focused, and are according to studies are becoming money focused at last (ie budget oriented). Teenagers switch interests as quickly as whatever early adopters change their mind about what is cool.

In terms of ecosystem investment, google has a massive upperhand - google services are used in the education system throughout the world, even where ChromeOS isn't popular. So are windows devices and application ecosystems. Comparative software and service penetration for apple - it's relatively small. Once you take away the iPhone, maybe the ipad too, all you have left is the mac, and some branding value that could easily disappear if it had inferior products.

The only way apple is any of these games if it had a technological and software edge. It needs to be in the same ballpark for polish. I'm not sure it will be.

If I was apple I would:

*Immediately start scaling OSX for ARM chipsets and touchscreens, ie merge OSX and iOS.

*Develop a HoloLens competitor running on the same platform

*Make a real ultramobile rather than the ipad pro.

*I'd also probably invest majorly in a Ai based search engine to compete with google -

right now they have the window to make it work, and that would help keep them funded in the years between the smartphone boom and convergence (seeing as they have literally no shot at VR, unlike playstation and Microsoft, and amazon one of MSFTs partners seems to be leading in IoT, with google not far behind).

I've heard some things that make me think this _might_ happen, and this is the only rumour apart from the HoloLens competitor rumour that gives me any faith in what apple is doing. Certainly apple might be doing a lot in secret, that we don't know about, but nothing we do know about for sure gives me the kind of faith everyone else seems to have.


Blackberry used to rule the smartphone. Microsoft the OS. Nokia the phone. Tech isn't sports shoes, you need more than temporary cool to keep afloat.

Here's a list of iconic brands that fell from their place of honour:
Pan Am
Poloroid
Blockbuster Video
Nokia
Enron
Oldsmobile
IBM
Woolworth's
General foods
Walkman
Amiga
Sega
And the list goes on....history is a litany of companies that used to be "it". Tech especially. Look at how nintendo has to hold of for dear life. They used to be king of the pack in portable and console gaming, now they are very lucky to have stumble upon a comeback that gives them any significant market share - and even then, playstation is bigger, xbox is bigger, PC gaming is bigger, all they have left, with a great deal of effort, is a comfortable profitable niche (that could also vanish should one of those others make a comparable product)

 

[Drael646464]

Okay here we go:

https://patentable.com/co-ownership-of-patents/

Apparently in the US it's unrestricted by default and it depends on the specific legal arrangements of the partners. So we won't be able to know what the Samsung, Microsoft deal involves in terms of restrictions on licensing and so on. Only that it probably will mean a promoted Windows Core bearing product of some kind (But probably also a ChromeOS or fushia version).

So long as MSFT makes it's hybrid convergence OS product polished enough, it should have the right OEMs for a competitive shot at the market, especially if it can capitalise on it's OSes lead in gaming (that IMO could be key, if people can have a folding tablet that can run a litany of games, then it essentially becomes a phone, a tablet, a PC, a laptop and home gaming console, and a portable gaming console - they'll probably uptake that over something without the gaming potential)

and to lesser extent AR. And also to some lesser degree it's partnership with steam for VR and it's place in education and enterprise, simply because a broader hardware ecosystem and adoption outside of that portable device, will also encourage adoption and enrich the software ecosystem (beyond mere PWAs)

I'm certainly interested to see the outcome. It wouldn't bother me if apple was in their competing as well.

I think each brand will have it's strengths and weaknesses, and success will also ABSOLUTELY depend on partnerships, because I don't believe any one company can cover AI, IoT, AR/VR, convergence, distributed computing and the cloud, all on it's own.

That of course is another reason why I doubt apple - it's refusal to play nice. The future is too big, and too complicated for proprietary anti-competitive practices. That alone could be a death knell.

 

[PerfectReign]

Kind of interesting. My daily drivers are now a Iphone X and a Iphone 7. Yet I still occasionally go back to my Elite X3. It actually is a brilliant device to hold and use. Only things aside from apps are the horrid camera and the lag on WM10.

Now if only I could get Ios on a device like the X3 with a 6" screen and 16:9 aspect ratio

Sent from mTalk on my HP Elite X3

 

[Ryujingt3]

Kind of interesting. My daily drivers are now a Iphone X and a Iphone 7. Yet I still occasionally go back to my Elite X3. It actually is a brilliant device to hold and use. Only things aside from apps are the horrid camera and the lag on WM10.

Now if only I could get Ios on a device like the X3 with a 6" screen and 16:9 aspect ratio

Sent from mTalk on my HP Elite X3

I really enjoyed my Elite X3 too. Sadly the lack of apps and complete abandonment from MS made me move to Android. Android is okay for what I need it to be but it doesn't make me feel like I actually want to use it, unlike W10M used to.

Okay here we go:

https://patentable.com/co-ownership-of-patents/

Apparently in the US it's unrestricted by default and it depends on the specific legal arrangements of the partners. So we won't be able to know what the Samsung, Microsoft deal involves in terms of restrictions on licensing and so on. Only that it probably will mean a promoted Windows Core bearing product of some kind (But probably also a ChromeOS or fushia version).

So long as MSFT makes it's hybrid convergence OS product polished enough, it should have the right OEMs for a competitive shot at the market, especially if it can capitalise on it's OSes lead in gaming (that IMO could be key, if people can have a folding tablet that can run a litany of games, then it essentially becomes a phone, a tablet, a PC, a laptop and home gaming console, and a portable gaming console - they'll probably uptake that over something without the gaming potential)

and to lesser extent AR. And also to some lesser degree it's partnership with steam for VR and it's place in education and enterprise, simply because a broader hardware ecosystem and adoption outside of that portable device, will also encourage adoption and enrich the software ecosystem (beyond mere PWAs)

I'm certainly interested to see the outcome. It wouldn't bother me if apple was in their competing as well.

I think each brand will have it's strengths and weaknesses, and success will also ABSOLUTELY depend on partnerships, because I don't believe any one company can cover AI, IoT, AR/VR, convergence, distributed computing and the cloud, all on it's own.

That of course is another reason why I doubt apple - it's refusal to play nice. The future is too big, and too complicated for proprietary anti-competitive practices. That alone could be a death knell.

You make some very valid points, and kudos also for mentioning the Amiga, I love that computer so much! Apple clearly have the money to do the same as MS or Google. They may be going in a different direction though. Ultimately, knowing MS, I still think that even if they manage to pull all this off (and it's a big if) they still will fail. They make the same mistakes over and over and never seem to learn, despite having great ideas and innovative tech. It's a shame.

 

[Drael646464]

I really enjoyed my Elite X3 too. Sadly the lack of apps and complete abandonment from MS made me move to Android. Android is okay for what I need it to be but it doesn't make me feel like I actually want to use it, unlike W10M used to.



You make some very valid points, and kudos also for mentioning the Amiga, I love that computer so much! Apple clearly have the money to do the same as MS or Google. They may be going in a different direction though. Ultimately, knowing MS, I still think that even if they manage to pull all this off (and it's a big if) they still will fail. They make the same mistakes over and over and never seem to learn, despite having great ideas and innovative tech. It's a shame.

Amiga had the first GUI for a mainstream computer if I recall right. Made use of digitized sound more than any other computer at the time. Made graphical standards. In a way, it sort of reminds me of a mac, where they used specialized chips. It's sort of weird how we had all those computers at the start - Amstrad, vic20, bbc computer, and many others, then it all just came down to two kinds of computer OS, both running on the same hardware platform (or two hardware platforms if you count ARM). And you can't really pick any strong practical reasons why some over some others - the windows GUI existed before both mac and windows, more just happenstances of the marketplace.

Some market strategy sure, but also just some dumb luck as to what things got taken up. Perhaps we overestimate the intentionality and strategy of success. If you look at career success, you can break it down to about 50 percent talent/50 percent is probably just dumb luck. Perhaps markets and business work the same.