If Microsoft deems it necessary to not update us due to lower hardware it would be for good reason. I'm sure Nokia will out one of the first awesome wp8 phones which would to me be worth the off contract buy out to experience wp8 the way it's meant
If Microsoft deems it necessary to not update us due to lower hardware it would be for good reason. I'm sure Nokia will out one of the first awesome wp8 phones which would to me be worth the off contract buy out to experience wp8 the way it's meant
Same here. And should WP8 not be backward compatible, I will need written assurances that WP9 (and10) will be backward compatible to WP8 before I consider a purchase. But with that said, I don't need dial core, more stuff squeezed inn my screen, or another way for cyber thieves to steal my money. My L900 is just about right. Now if WP8 has a battery that lasts a week, different tune.I'm sure there are some people who feel the same way, but not everyone can or will drop $500+ on a phone. And don't forget, Win 8 tablets will be coming out around the same time, and will likely cost about the same as an unsubsidized Apollo phone. Given a choice, I will buy a Win 8 tablet before I pay full retail for a smartphone. That's just me though.
iPhone 3GS got iOS 5 so there's no excuse for them not putting Apollo on Launch Handsets.
A kernel change is a big deal yes, but seriously? A company as famed for legacy hardware support as Microsoft can't produce drivers for the very limited number of different components currently used by Windows Phones?How many WM 6.5 devices got WP7? If WP8 goes to the Win8 kernel as rumored then this is a much bigger change than the switch from WM6.5 to WP7. If WP8 sticks with the WinCE kernel then the current devices should get WP8. But a kernel change is a biggie.
A kernel change is a big deal yes, but seriously? A company as famed for legacy hardware support as Microsoft can't produce drivers for the very limited number of different components currently used by Windows Phones?
How many WM 6.5 devices got WP7? If WP8 goes to the Win8 kernel as rumored then this is a much bigger change than the switch from WM6.5 to WP7. If WP8 sticks with the WinCE kernel then the current devices should get WP8. But a kernel change is a biggie.
Microsoft intentionally broke compatibility with Windows Mobile for several reasons:
a. Chasis requirements. Supporting old devices would make them have to put in legacy code and keep that code in the codebase for upwards of 1-2 years because even those people with old HD2s would be crying for updates.
2. Minimum Specs, outside of the HD2, most Windows Mobile phones had Specs worse than Blackberry Bolds back then (think Bold 9780) and wouldn't be able to support the OS at any decent performance level.
Kernel Changes aren't a big problem. You need drivers for the hardware, that is all. As long as the device is speced well enough to run the OS (kernel) it will run. It's not a big deal.
It's not a bigger switch than from Windows Mobile to Windows Phone. The entire development model and user interface change, and core features were added or gutted out going from WM to WP7.
I think we are both overlooking one thing , or assuming. WIN RT (windows 8 phone) Will be designed for ARM chipsets. SO going with that line of thinking the requirements are going to be less. So if win 8 for PC has a requirement of 1gb of ram , then i would think logically that 512mb would be a logical number for the ARM version of windows 8 for phones. Which technically means the current line of phones should have the ability to run windows phone 8.
iPhone 3GS got iOS 5 so there's no excuse for them not putting Apollo on Launch Handsets. It will be somewhat embarassing when you put it all into context and with the new high end phones coming out it can drive some people away (next iPhone, Galaxy S 3, etc.).
Also, if you're gonna have to upgrade for a software update then there's really no reason not to get an Android phone with better hardware and a more feature-filled now aesthetically pleasing OS on it.
There's nothing good about that. One of the biggest selling points for WP7 for early adopters was the alleged faster update turnaround (turned out to be not the case) and not having to "upgrade to update," which was the percieved (real or not) policy for Android at that time (especially amidst all the FroYo update madness that was going on back then).
Additionally, there are 3 year contracts in some countries so people who bought launch devices cheap less than a year ago will be stuck with them and an old OS version for potentially 1+ years due to contract terms and ETF fees. Nevermind people always start looking at alternatives when they feel like they are being forced to upgrade to update their devices.
Blackberry (especially Storm/Storm 2) users did that. Android users do it, and even older iPhone users did it when their old iPhones got dropped. Supporting the 3GS was a brilliant move on Apple's part. Microsoft would be well to emulate that in Windows Phone, since at least that part hasn't been proven yet.
They don't have the excuses Android OEMs have IRT dropping support for devices like that.
Also android ICS more aesthetically pleasing than WP? Don't know where you get this from either.
you're forgetting one thing, when the iPhone 4S launched even the iPhone 4 users ponied up the cash for one,that's bound to be more expensive than a WP off contract would be, so this logic is failed. Also android ICS more aesthetically pleasing than WP? Don't know where you get this from either.