Is windows phone 7 dead?

[Bobert_123]

I know WebOS is

R.I.P.

 

[jabtano]

I think WP8 dead. look at the OEMS what are they doing? not much... Nokia? all low end middle range device one high end. If anything WP will become the low end OS. even if Nokia puts out another high end device it will be exclusive only which hurts almost as much as there exclusive apps help there cause.

 

[1101x10]

I think WP8 dead. look at the OEMS what are they doing? not much... Nokia? all low end middle range device one high end. If anything WP will become the low end OS. even if Nokia puts out another high end device it will be exclusive only which hurts almost as much as there exclusive apps help there cause.

"In 2012, the global market for cellphones that cost $250 or less grew by 99 percent from 2011, and accounted for more than half of all cellphones sold worldwide, according to IDC.
The upper-end segment of smartphones costing more than $250 grew by only 23 percent during the same period."

 

[travisel]

I went from WM6.5.7 to WP8 Portico OS and never had a chance to use WP7, WP7.5, WP7.8 platform.

But what Microsoft did to me with WM6.5 will happen to you with WP7.8 I give it 9 months more till WP8 First birthday!

Coming from WM6.5 I feel for you WP7.8 users!

 

[St_Deborah]

I hope not. I'm already disturbed @ the different support. I mean I guess it'd be no big deal if my NL900 was one of those devices that can run another operating system if desired in the long run like the N9 and HD2 (which 4 some reason seems to never die). Otherwise, besides lacking some apps and web abilities I could do on my Skyrocket, I like my Lumia. Sometimes when reading around, it does seem like WP7 just kinda got the boot. I'll never understand why the NL800 was upgraded to the NL 900 only for tge NL 920 to come out a few months later... But oh well.

 

[a5cent]

Sometimes when reading around, it does seem like WP7 just kinda got the boot.

I'd say your own personal experiences should be more valuable that what you gather from "reading around".

Do you still get updates? Do you still get Nokia Support? How often have you wanted an app that is only available on WP8 (often, rarely, never)? Is there some killer OS feature you really want, that is only available on WP8? If you don't feel left behind in those areas (compared to WP8, not Android or iOS), then I don't think your device "got the boot".

 

[fatclue_98]

You guys (and gals - Laura) think WP7 is dead? Hospice care maybe, but certainly not dead. I have a webOS Pre3, now THAT'S dead.

 

[HNNNNNGHHH]

For official support, yes. (With the exception for Nokia in most cases)

When it comes to the developer ring, no.

Sure, there's only a few custom ROM's out there for WP7.x but some offer interop, even full unlock. Don't even mention the multitude of homebrew apps on Bazaar...

 

[Abdul Rahman Noor]

Maybe its not dead *yet*, but it WILL be; and that's a reality which I can't understand why so many people have a hard time accepting.

Sometimes a device or technology outlives its time and goes on to become a legend - like the Commodore 64 or VHS (you can still buy cassettes btw).
Yet sometimes it dies without having lived it's full life - killed maybe by its maker or rendered obsolete by other tech. Or sometimes it's killed just because it wasn't worth investing into anymore.

Yes, you bought your shiny Lumia 800/900 weeks before WP8 was announced and you're angry there's nothing new for it. We get it. But that's just one of the risks you took when choosing to becoming an Early Adopter.

If you think you're angry, think about all the people who bought a Digital Audio Tape, HD-DVD player, PSP-Go, Kin phone, Logitech Revue (Google TV), or an hp TouchPad...

 

[fatclue_98]

At least the TouchPad still lives on with CM10. It's funny that the devices you mentioned are fairly recent. You should have seen what people were plunking down for a Betamax when minimum wage was $3.10/hr and a new Accord was $4,000.

 

[Chregu]

Yes, you bought your shiny Lumia 800/900 weeks before WP8 was announced and you're angry there's nothing new for it. We get it. But that's just one of the risks you took when choosing to becoming an Early Adopter.

I have seldom read such a terrible remark.

Sorry, but Windows Phone 7 was out for two years, before Microsoft changed everything with Windows Phone 8. When do you think do we stop being early adopters? That's just no excuse, or will you be all right if they do it all again in two years? Because we are early adopters?

I don't use the words I'd like to use right now, so I'll let it be at this.

 

[MinnesotaSteve]

I am a software developer. I have contributed to OS development (RTOS). Can you please explain to me how that is a valid reason? You might sight budget limitations, but IMHO there is no technical reason that stands in the way of that update occurring, you need only consider that both WP7 and WP8 run on ARMv7 based CPU's.

I'm a software developer as well, and agree. The only difference is the WP8 phones use a Snapdragon S4 which is dual or quad core, whereas the Snapdragon S2 used in the WP7 phones is only single core.

I'm guessing that the concern was CPU speed. People have commented that even with the faster processor WP8 is still slower than WP7.

Regardless, I thought it was a bonehead move to not provide some upgrade path for say the Lumia 900.

Meanwhile the iPad2 I bought about 6 months prior to my Lumia 900 just got yet another app update a couple of weeks ago, and while some of the new features of iOS6 aren't available... it hasn't been completely abandoned.

I honestly regret not getting the iPhone now. I actually was looking into development on the windows phone just when they announced the abandonment campaign, which put a damper on that.

 

[Delin95]

I wouldn't mind buying a new phone, if I could transfer all my wp7 data over to my new wp8 device.

 

[a5cent]

I'm guessing that the concern was CPU speed. People have commented that even with the faster processor WP8 is still slower than WP7.

Regardless, I thought it was a bonehead move...

Hey Steve! In one of my previous posts in this thread, I mentioned (and indirectly linked) a video from Microsoft Research, which demonstrated that MinWin runs faster than WCE on identical ARM hardware. Hardware limitations were not the reason... neither compatibility nor performance.

Differences in perceived performance are mostly due to the much "heavier" but also much more capable .NET runtime environment. Its presence is most noticeable during runtime initialization, which occurs each time a managed app is launched.

I don't think the move was bone headed though. I don't think it is fair to make that judgment without understanding their reasons.

Obviously, I understand your frustrations to a degree. I think Microsoft's biggest screw up, is that they were not upfront and transparent about their update policy. They knew before WP7 launched it wouldn't get the WP8 update, and they should have let you know too. Unfortunately, they still aren't explaining their update policy.

 

[akar33]

I am a software developer. I have contributed to OS development (RTOS). Can you please explain to me how that is a valid reason? You might sight budget limitations, but IMHO there is no technical reason that stands in the way of that update occurring, you need only consider that both WP7 and WP8 run on ARMv7 based CPU's.

That is like saying an OS that runs on Ivy Bridge (2012 x86 CPU model) can't run on a Sandy Bridge (2011 x86 CPU model). It's friggen' ridiculous. Logically, it's the exact same CPU, one of them is just somewhat faster at executing the exact same instructions. Sorry for picking on you. I've just seen this utter BS repeated once to often. Nothing personal.

You are right. The kernel can most definitely run on a WP7 era hardware, but it was most likely a cost decision and the benefits vs. cost debate is a huge one in a software development company. Also, moving forward, carrying on the CE kernel from 1995 wasn't a good option for the maturity of the OS. The NT kernel can offer more extensibility and it's most likely the only kernel that's being continuously developed and improved upon at Microsoft. And, merging the kernel from the Windows tree is always beneficial for the OS. The main reason iOS is so good is because it runs on the same kernel as OSX, which in turn is based on a Unix kernel.

 

[a5cent]

You are right. The kernel can most definitely run on a WP7 era hardware, but it was most likely a cost decision and the benefits vs. cost debate is a huge one in a software development company. Also, moving forward, carrying on the CE kernel from 1995 wasn't a good option for the maturity of the OS. The NT kernel can offer more extensibility and it's most likely the only kernel that's being continuously developed and improved upon at Microsoft. And, merging the kernel from the Windows tree is always beneficial for the OS. The main reason iOS is so good is because it runs on the same kernel as OSX, which in turn is based on a Unix kernel.

Software is a highly tractable medium. It can be made to do anything you want it to. In that sense, I don't really understand what people mean when they say the NT kernel is more extensible than CE. I find that too unspecific for me to agree or disagree with.

CE has always run on more CPU architectures than Windows. It still does. CE7 supports up to 256 cores while W8 supports "only" 64. Just considering those two things, and assuming extensible relates to hardware, CE7 sounds more "extensible" to me than W8.

The thing is, barely a single consumer has a working understanding of software. Without a background in software engineering it just isn't palpable. As a result, many will desperately try to relate any OS related decision to hardware. That isn't how it works.

The main concerns that lead Microsoft to dump CE were software related. One of Microsoft's top priorities was to make it as easy as possible to port apps between WP8 and W8RT. That only works if the .NET runtime environments on both of those operating systems work identically. Unfortunately, CE's .NET runtime environment is a very stripped down version of its larger sibling. Making both of them 100% compatible (and keeping them compatible) is an extremely difficult and costly affair. That isn't feasible. The better option was to bring the entire Windows .NET runtime over to WP. However, the Windows .NET runtime makes direct calls into MinWin, so MinWin had to be brought over as well. The Windows kernel is part of MinWin, so that is how it too ended up on WP. Hardware extensibility doesn't factor into any of this.

it was most likely a cost decision and the benefits vs. cost debate is a huge one in a software development company.

Absolutely, but that too wasn't the main reason. Think of a gaming console, and how updates are handled in that space and why. If you understand why the update policies in that space are the way they are, and the benefits they offer (to OS and 3rd party developers), then you will also understand what Microsoft was thinking with WP.

 

[unstoppablekem]

I'm still using a WP7 device, and I've gotten a bunch of new apps lately. I got Assassin's Creed and Earthworm Jim games a couple weeks ago. I just got Foroplex today, Angry Birds Seasons is also available.WhatsApp got the latest updates.

Wait lak, so you don't have a wp8 device, only a 7 device?


Sent from my iSheep Tablet 3 using WPCentral Forums app

 

[MinnesotaSteve]

I don't think the move was bone headed though. I don't think it is fair to make that judgment without understanding their reasons.

Obviously, I understand your frustrations to a degree. I think Microsoft's biggest screw up, is that they were not upfront and transparent about their update policy. They knew before WP7 launched it wouldn't get the WP8 update, and they should have let you know too. Unfortunately, they still aren't explaining their update policy.

It probably didn't matter much. Had we known at the time the Lumia 900 was a dead product before it was even released, nobody would have bought it. So while they created a lot of ill-will, they were able to prop up their numbers slightly for a few months even if in the long run they created a lot of ill will with current owners. It's the classic innovators dilemma I guess.

Microsoft needs to get their stuff together. Firing the advertising group responsible for the horrid Surface commercials would be a start.

 

[DBDev]

I don't think it's dead yet but it's dying rappidly. For example many live tiles in 7.8 are not working and MS don't seem to care. It is also not as fun reading news here on WPCentral anymore because most of the apps they write about don't work on my Lumia 800

 

[gedzum]

I don't think it's dead yet but it's dying rappidly. For example many live tiles in 7.8 are not working and MS don't seem to care. It is also not as fun reading news here on WPCentral anymore because most of the apps they write about don't work on my Lumia 800

Yeah I agree. Not quite dead, but certainly an after thought. It's a shame really, because I really like my Lumia 800 hardware. The Lumia 800 section in the forum also isn't as active anymore, which is expected along with more focus on the WP8 stuff on this site. Still, can't help but feel slightly out of the loop. I might check out the 720 for my next device.