Why WP has such slow growth

[andylees66]

I have recently purchased a HTC One X (Tegra 3 version). All I can say is WP7 murders Android. My old HD7 is faster at web browsing, better GPS (4 hours navigation vs 2 hours on the One X). Couple this with the fact that you can buy a WP7 device and not download any apps and still have an extremely usable OS. I've had to spend nearly $100 on apps and my One X still doesn't have all the functionality of my old HD7. I could give many examples but my post would be ignored

 

[fatclue_98]

I still despise LeQuit after his "decision" fiasco, since he showed no class. Go Celtics!

Laura, are you mad at me because I'm from Miami? Sorry about what we did to the Tribe in '97. LOL!!!

 

[AngryNil]

My old HD7 is faster at web browsing...

Would you be able to shoot a video of this? I sincerely doubt the HD7 can render pages faster than the One X, even with the less-than-stellar stock Android browser. If it is the case, might want to give Chrome a shot.

 

[Laura Knotek]

Laura, are you mad at me because I'm from Miami? Sorry about what we did to the Tribe in '97. LOL!!!

Actually, I'm not mad at you (or the Marlins) in the least. The Marlins won fair and square.

I'd have nothing against LeBron if he had just gone ahead and signed with a different team. His lack of class in making his whole "decision" thing into a soap opera and then having his own TV special to announce it is what burned me.

I still like CC Sabathia, even though he's with the Yankees now. He was classy, though. When he left Cleveland, he took out a full page ad in the Cleveland Plain Dealer to thank all the fans.

 

[bilzkh]

"Why WP has such slow growth?"

Answer: Because some carrier rep in Fall 2010 thought the Xperia X10 was better than Samsung Focus.

 

[N8ter]

I have recently purchased a HTC One X (Tegra 3 version). All I can say is WP7 murders Android. My old HD7 is faster at web browsing, better GPS (4 hours navigation vs 2 hours on the One X). Couple this with the fact that you can buy a WP7 device and not download any apps and still have an extremely usable OS. I've had to spend nearly $100 on apps and my One X still doesn't have all the functionality of my old HD7. I could give many examples but my post would be ignored

You're either really trying to stretch things, or you're outright lying.

There is very little if anything that a stock HD7 can do that a One X can't do. Almost all oif HTC's apps for the HD7 are built-in to the One X. Photo Enhancer, Sound Enhancer, Watch, Connected Media, Locations, etc. are all there. Obviously Google's services are integrated either via the base OS or with their apps - including Drive/Picasa (Gallery/Share Integration), YouTube, Gmail, etc.

HTC Sense integrates with Facebook and Twitter via FriendStream since 2009.

The Camera on the HTC One X alone is enough to buy it over the HD7, and it has better battery life.

And as for performance I did try both the One X and the Vivid and they both actually (from a usability perspective) were as smooth as any Windows Phone.

However, I'm really curious as to how you think the Stock build on the One X (or Vivid, or even most Sense 3.0/3.5 devices) lacks stock features compared to WP7. It doesn't, unless you're crying cause you want to use Microsoft services on a Google device?

Maybe I'll do a comparison video review of the two once I get mine and upload it to YouTube.

 

[N8ter]

I typed a long response but then I decided it really doesn't matter. WP doesn't seem to work for you and that's perfectly ok. You have to find what you like and obviously WP isn't it. Hope you find something that you are satisfied with.

I had a huge response and replaced it with that shorter one. Glad we agree on something.

 

[sentimentGX4]

Would you be able to shoot a video of this? I sincerely doubt the HD7 can render pages faster than the One X, even with the less-than-stellar stock Android browser. If it is the case, might want to give Chrome a shot.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if it were true.

Smartphones have become largely overpowered when it comes to web browsing. (It's like how a computer with an i7 won't load a page faster than one with a Core 2 Duo.) While the One X has the extra ooomph, it's largely irrelevant. My phone actually loads webpages faster than my computer some times.

The One X probably does a host of things faster than the HD7; but, faster web browsing has rarely been one of the new praises for the new "superphones". Many tech blogs even skip the entire what-not about fluidity at this point and dive straight to the benchmarking.

(Do note that I'm not attacking cutting edge specs. The new SoCs are more battery efficient and good for other things, like playing games or intensive apps. They're just not particularly good for speeding up your web browsing. It's like arguing which phone can make a faster 2G phone call at this point.)



EDIT: At this point, I would like to point out that it irks me how some tech enthusiasts, especially Android users (but even most WP users), are completely disillusioned with the capability of specs. When a new, faster phone comes out, some users automatically start assuming that the old phone has trouble doing many things it did perfectly before when nothing about the phone has changed!

For example, one Android fan told me that Windows Phones such as the HTC Titan could not multitask due to hardware limitations. I quickly pointed out how ridiculous that statement was considering that the Nexus S and HTC HD2 are two of the most popular modding devices and multitask just fine.

The most annoying part about these comments is that many of these people actually owned the old device they are bashing and experienced how it worked. Just because a faster phone comes out doesn't make your old phone any slower!

 

[N8ter]

Faster web browsing has almost always been one of the new praises of new super phones. It's not just about the HTML rendering, it's also about Java Script execution and that's one areas where HTC's ICS browser is superior to IE9 mobile. With HTML5 growing in use (esp for mobile sites), the JS engine and SoC in the phones are big factors for web browsing.

Also hard to test the speed when one is loading full pages with Flash enabled and the other doesn't have flash. The only way to see is to do it yourself or see a video. I did go into the AT&T store with my HD7 to look at phones. All of their ICS devices (which are HTC dual core devices here) exibited faster web browsing than the HD7.

The One X is also a HSPA+/LTE device (depending on region) while the HD7 is simply HSPA, so that can throw off comparisons as well (unless done only on WiFi).

But to be quite honest, I don't tend to "browse" the web much on my smartphones. I access services and content through apps 95% of the time.

 

[scottcraft]

I would expect a newer dual-core android phone with ics to load web pages faster than my trophy. I played with a galaxy nexus in the Verizon store and it was faster than my phone. I didn't have a chance to try both phones on wifi but I think the result would still be the same.

 

[N8ter]

The most annoying part about these comments is that many of these people actually owned the old device they are bashing and experienced how it worked. Just because a faster phone comes out doesn't make your old phone any slower!

HW isn't just about speed.

And the reason why the HD7 can be used as a decent example for most things is cause there isn't really much of a performance difference between it and Mango devices, since the Hardware didn't receive a huge upgrade in those devices and the software is identical barring OEM/Carrier Apps (all uninstallable) and camera interface customization.

What you're complaining about works better vs. Android since OEMs love to leave older devices behind to carrot people into upgrading their phones often. Microsoft took a totally different approach and while it's actually good for the consumer it's not really all that great for sales since many people don't feel the need to upgrade their devices. I can see some people using an HD7 for 3 years if it gets any type of WP8 upgrade.

I think the reason microsoft would potentially leave the older devices back is precicely to force people to upgrade to newer devices - not only for the sake of upping sales, but for the sake of making third party developers' jobs easier.

Cause newer games optimized for better hardware will definitely not run as well on those old devices.

No, it doesn't make your device run any slower. One GHz at whatever efficiency the device exhibits will continue to be that as long as it runs. But compared to what's coming out these days (multi-cores where just one core can outperform the entire SoC in any Windows Phone), they're getting comparatively slower if you take the average among high end smartphones.

6 month old Android high end devices are commodity now. AT&T has Vivids for $49 on contract ($9.99 if you order on the web site). It is extremely hard to compete with that. All the AT&T stores here are sold out of them. I have to drive 50 miles later to get one and had to beg the manager at that store to hold it for me because of how well they're selling (probably boosted by the fact that it just got the ICS OTA).

 

[Fleon]

There is a difference between recommending to someone and giving an opinion. Anybody who asks me I'll tell them that I really like WP7, but I I'll also tell them to check it out for themselves. Everybody has different needs and wants so what works for me may be overkill for someone else, or vice-versa. Waiting for the fall is definitely the best advice since we'll all be able to see what's out there.

Quite right on that distinction. But now, the platform has matured enough that I have recommended it to quite a few. Admittedly, I don't think it's the platform for everyone- some people have particular needs that WP7 doesn't fit. But overall, everyone except one person who's gotten WP7 on my suggestion has really liked it. The other person had a very significant need for Google Voice and Street View that came up later.

 

[Fleon]

AntennaGate
iOS Users waned their Notification system forever
They complained about the lack of Multi-Tasking
What about iOS5 battery life issues - that was patched fast, after much revolt

Sorry, but they're quite vocal about issues in their OS and its shortcomings.

Vocal doesn't mean they won't buy it- which is the only indicator of the acceptance factor for shortcomings that really matters. Hey, have you watched the recent interview with Tim Cook? You would like it- talks about some of the things you've been posting.

 

[N8ter]

Vocal doesn't mean they won't buy it- which is the only indicator of the acceptance factor for shortcomings that really matters. Hey, have you watched the recent interview with Tim Cook? You would like it- talks about some of the things you've been posting.

There are other reasons why people continue to buy iPhones. For one, if you have a bunch of Macs and other Apple devices (iPad, iTouch, AppleTV) then it makes sense to go with Apple over something like WP7 or even Android. Their devices integrate better than any other manufacturer's products on the market right now.

Secondly, a lot of people have a lot of money tied into Apple's ecosystem. Some people have been with iOS since the beginning and have hundreds of dollars tied up in Apps. They aren't going to pay $2-600 for a different phone to pay $1-300 more rebuying apps that they have on iOS - if they even exist.

Thirdly, while Apple does have issues, they excelled in places where other devices didn't. Their Retina screen was better than anything else on the market back then (including Samsung's PenTile sAMOLED screens), they had one of the best smartphone cameras on the market, and as a PMP the iPhone is superior to almost any other device on the market by virtue of it being basically an iTouch with a cell radio, etc.

I haven't even touched on all the docks and other accessories that would go to waste if people were to switch off that device if they've invested in that.

Additionally, while they're vocal about Apple's issues, Apple has typically responded swiftly to them - especially software issues. They issue patches quickly and their customers don't have to deal with the Carrier hoopla that other platforms impose here in the States.

I've already seen that interview. Microsoft has the same types of customers. Google as well. Even Palm had some fanatical customers who would buy anything they put out there. Apple has just tended to farm a larger core user base than other companies. Good for them.

 

[fatclue_98]

There are other reasons why people continue to buy iPhones. For one, if you have a bunch of Macs and other Apple devices (iPad, iTouch, AppleTV) then it makes sense to go with Apple over something like WP7 or even Android. Their devices integrate better than any other manufacturer's products on the market right now.

Secondly, a lot of people have a lot of money tied into Apple's ecosystem. Some people have been with iOS since the beginning and have hundreds of dollars tied up in Apps. They aren't going to pay $2-600 for a different phone to pay $1-300 more rebuying apps that they have on iOS - if they even exist.

Thirdly, while Apple does have issues, they excelled in places where other devices didn't. Their Retina screen was better than anything else on the market back then (including Samsung's PenTile sAMOLED screens), they had one of the best smartphone cameras on the market, and as a PMP the iPhone is superior to almost any other device on the market by virtue of it being basically an iTouch with a cell radio, etc.

I haven't even touched on all the docks and other accessories that would go to waste if people were to switch off that device if they've invested in that.

Additionally, while they're vocal about Apple's issues, Apple has typically responded swiftly to them - especially software issues. They issue patches quickly and their customers don't have to deal with the Carrier hoopla that other platforms impose here in the States.

I've already seen that interview. Microsoft has the same types of customers. Google as well. Even Palm had some fanatical customers who would buy anything they put out there. Apple has just tended to farm a larger core user base than other companies. Good for them.

Palm had "fanatical" customers because their OS was, at the time, superior to everything, iOS included. It was the only mobile OS that could sync with Windows or OSX without 3rd party software. Still is. Their PIM was, and is, light years ahead. I sorely miss the "reply with text" option when on a phone call. Unfortunately, Palm didn't keep up with the Joneses when it came to specs or features. No 3G, wi-fi or GPS on OS 5.4.9 and Bluetooth was a middling 1.2. Did I mention that your iOS integration statement was severely flawed? Even Windows Mobile was better integrated than iOS. If you're referring to the current crop of phones, there's room for debate.

 

[N8ter]

Palm had "fanatical" customers because their OS was, at the time, superior to everything, iOS included. It was the only mobile OS that could sync with Windows or OSX without 3rd party software. Still is. Their PIM was, and is, light years ahead. I sorely miss the "reply with text" option when on a phone call. Unfortunately, Palm didn't keep up with the Joneses when it came to specs or features. No 3G, wi-fi or GPS on OS 5.4.9 and Bluetooth was a middling 1.2. Did I mention that your iOS integration statement was severely flawed? Even Windows Mobile was better integrated than iOS. If you're referring to the current crop of phones, there's room for debate.

No, your reading comprehension is just failing you.

I said Apple has superior integration across their product lines than other platforms. That's why I said people with other Apple products (iMac, MacBook, iPhone, iTouch, AppleTV, etc.) tend to buy other iOS devices.

Look, it's pretty simple:

For one, if you have a bunch of Macs and other Apple devices (iPad, iTouch, AppleTV) then it makes sense to go with Apple over something like WP7 or even Android. Their devices integrate better than any other manufacturer's products on the market right now.

Windows Mobile couldn't even access Zune services, and had literally no XBL support. Microsoft service integration on Windows Mobile was bare at best, and there wasn't really much in Windows on the Desktop. All it had was a Sync Client, which iTunes also provides for iOS devices (including synching Outlook Data). I wouldn't say it was any better integrated with Windows than the average iDevice back then (and certainly isn't now), but iDevices are clearly superior to competing products when it comes to integrating with Macs and other Apple devices and the software on their computers.

What I wrote was pretty clear... Apple's devices have better integration than other manufacturer's devices. That's a driving force for people to invest further into their ecosystem than competing manufacturers who only loosely integrate their products.

Microsoft knows this. That is why they're tying Windows Live into everything (starting with XB360, then their mobile platform with Windows desktop/tablet to follow).

 

[Nataku4ca]

No, your reading comprehension is just failing you.

I said Apple has superior integration across their product lines than other platforms. That's why I said people with other Apple products (iMac, MacBook, iPhone, iTouch, AppleTV, etc.) tend to buy other iOS devices.

Look, it's pretty simple:



Windows Mobile couldn't even access Zune services, and had literally no XBL support. Microsoft service integration on Windows Mobile was bare at best, and there wasn't really much in Windows on the Desktop. All it had was a Sync Client, which iTunes also provides for iOS devices (including synching Outlook Data). I wouldn't say it was any better integrated with Windows than the average iDevice back then (and certainly isn't now), but iDevices are clearly superior to competing products when it comes to integrating with Macs and other Apple devices and the software on their computers.

What I wrote was pretty clear... Apple's devices have better integration than other manufacturer's devices. That's a driving force for people to invest further into their ecosystem than competing manufacturers who only loosely integrate their products.

Microsoft knows this. That is why they're tying Windows Live into everything (starting with XB360, then their mobile platform with Windows desktop/tablet to follow).

u know... i might have agreed with you if itune didn't fail me so many times... the only thing that really integrated well was probably airplay, other than that i don't see what is so great having all apple system

my gf's got a mac and iphone 4, i have an ipod (well used to anyways) and in all seriousness itune is pretty much the same on the mac and my win7 pc, and i don't know why, may be its me and my vibe her iphone4 had to be factory reset twice during the past two month just from plugging into itunes (apps wouldn't open anymore)

and your right microsoft is just getting started, apple has icloud now so thats more integration there, but thats about it

actually, google is probably the most integrated at this point from your point of view imo

 

[N8ter]

I've never had an issue with iTunes, personally, but I tend to prefer using WMP since it is built in and better integrated into the OS. I prefer to have to install as few apps as possible on my PC. I really preferred Vista and all of its built-in apps over Windows Live Essentials :-( I don't own Macs, therefore I don't feel the need to homogenize my setup - since WP7 integration with Windows 7 is almost non-existent, you can achieve the same thing (or superior results in most cases) by using an iPhone or HTC Sense device (or Samsung TouchWiz device if Kies desktop client is available in the US yet, been a while since I've checked).

iTunes is built into OS/X so it has less issues there. A lot of complaints about iTunes (Bloat and Performance) don't exist there since the components are native to Apple's system. QuickTime has always been a huge issue on Windows since it has been hijacking File Associations and MIME types in browsers on Windows Systems since Windows 95. Also not an issue on OS/X. iTunes used to require QuickTime, up until around iOS 5 release.

There are other perks, though, like being able to import media directly into iPhoto libraries from an iPhone/iTouch and things like that, instead of having it just dump everything into one subfolder like Zune does and then doing it later. You don't get that kind of cooperation from Windows Phone 7 and Microsoft's equivalent desktop Applications (Live Photo Gallery). That's something they need to work on, for the sake of their Windows 7 users who won't upgrade immediately (or quickly). I'd also like them to introduce Library synching like in Picasa for WLPG.

In any case, I totally believe you because I've had other people say similar things about iTunes. No software is perfect. iTunes and QuickTime certainly aren't.

 

[fisci]

I have recently purchased a HTC One X (Tegra 3 version). All I can say is WP7 murders Android. My old HD7 is faster at web browsing, better GPS (4 hours navigation vs 2 hours on the One X). Couple this with the fact that you can buy a WP7 device and not download any apps and still have an extremely usable OS. I've had to spend nearly $100 on apps and my One X still doesn't have all the functionality of my old HD7. I could give many examples but my post would be ignored

"I owned a porsche for a week and I must say, my toyota tercel is sooooo much faster."

I call bs on this post

 

[fatclue_98]

No, your reading comprehension is just failing you.

I said Apple has superior integration across their product lines than other platforms. That's why I said people with other Apple products (iMac, MacBook, iPhone, iTouch, AppleTV, etc.) tend to buy other iOS devices.

Look, it's pretty simple:



Windows Mobile couldn't even access Zune services, and had literally no XBL support. Microsoft service integration on Windows Mobile was bare at best, and there wasn't really much in Windows on the Desktop. All it had was a Sync Client, which iTunes also provides for iOS devices (including synching Outlook Data). I wouldn't say it was any better integrated with Windows than the average iDevice back then (and certainly isn't now), but iDevices are clearly superior to competing products when it comes to integrating with Macs and other Apple devices and the software on their computers.

What I wrote was pretty clear... Apple's devices have better integration than other manufacturer's devices. That's a driving force for people to invest further into their ecosystem than competing manufacturers who only loosely integrate their products.

Microsoft knows this. That is why they're tying Windows Live into everything (starting with XB360, then their mobile platform with Windows desktop/tablet to follow).

Which part of "integration" do you have the most trouble understanding? How exactly does an iPhone integrate with other Apple products? Because they're built by the same company? How do you get a document you create with your Macbook to your iPhone? Oh, and how do you transfer files (not music)?

You see, I have a Mac desktop and the only phone that would sync with it was my Treo (Palm OS). If I want to put my music into my phone, I'll put it on an SD card. Integration means just that. Being able to get data from one device to another with no fuss, no muss. Jailbreaking is not an option, we're talking out of the box. Try using your iPhone as a USB drive - out of the box.

Windows Mobile and Zune. That's like saying my Model T didn't have air conditioning. No sh!t, it wasn't around. My favorite statement was "Microsoft service integration on Windows Mobile was bare at best". WM was the ONLY platform that could sync tasks and notes on Exchange! What are you smoking? I thought Colombian Gold was the best when I was in college back around '82, but you got some good sh!t and me wants.

Dude, you like iOS - I see that. That's great. But don't be making those ridiculous claims to justify your choice of OS. It ain't that great, I have an iPhone 4S (company paid) and I can't stand it. Talk about useless as tits on a bull (personal opinion, no facts needed to back it up).