WP9 and strict hardware requirements

[eric12341]

No one has been or will be screwed over, MS has guaranteed a minimum of 18 months worth of updates.

 

[eshy]

Yes, you could install ios 5 on a 3GS, but the performance was crap and it didn't support all the features.

Comparing Android and WP on the update issue is ridiculous. All current WP7 phones will get updates up to 7.8. All Android phones other than the Nexus that were released when most of these WP7 phones were released aren't getting updates for a while now. My Android stopped getting updates 8 months after it was released. It never got Android 4.x.

Maybe the phones you're talking about have quad core CPUs (Android really needs that power) but that doesn't mean they'll still be getting updates a year from now.

Microsoft promised at least 18 months of updates for WP8 devices. I assume that's counting from the phone's release date, and assuming WP9 will be released next fall, all WP8 devices will get it.

If you're a .net dev, you should be able to understand that WP8 was a major change, the kind you don't do unless you have to and you don't do that with every major version release.

Most WP7 users I speak to don't feel like they got screwed. A lot of them think 7.8 is good enough. Average users don't care about those things

 

[santillanavila1993]

how do you know wp9 will be released next fall? wp7 lasted two years; wouldn't the same be assumed for wp8?

 

[spaulagain]

how do you know wp9 will be released next fall? wp7 lasted two years; wouldn't the same be assumed for wp8?

There is rumor that Microsoft's going "blue" means they are doing updates more frequently and possibly annually for version updates like WP9, W9.

More of an "agile" approach.

 

[smoledman]

There is rumor that Microsoft's going "blue" means they are doing updates more frequently and possibly annually for version updates like WP9, W9.

More of an "agile" approach.

Agile should mean more then once a year.

 

[nbktonic]

-- Sorry i am cross posting this, I initially intend to create this thread on this forum but inadvertently created in Lumia-920

I am in market for a new phone and I really like WP8 (920 in particular), i have been contemplating over for long and comparing between android and WPs.
As I am a .net dev., I am inclining towards WP (though i would really like Viber/Rebtel fully working, as I use it almost daily).

The only thing that bothers me is the thought if MSFT would screw us again by dictating new hardware requirement for WP9 and not letting us upgrade to the new OS without upgrading to a compatible hardware. I want my phone hardware to survive for next 2-3 years at least.

As a comparison, look at Android, almost all the 2012 android hardware released in 2012 are quad-core > 1.5ghz, LG/Motorola are already touching 2 ghz quad core or with Atom processors (rumor mill has it that Samsung Galaxy S4 would have 2Ghz quad core proc as well). With 2 gigs ram and super ghz multi cores, these hardware can take future release very easily.
Likewise, Apple let 4 generation old hardware iPhone 3GS upgradable to latest ios releases. Till date the resale value of iphone 3gs is probably one of the best give it is such an old model.

The best 2012 WP8 model is with 1 gig ram and 1.5 ghz dual core processor, does it not bother anyone why there is such a strict restriction for the vendors, knowing there is already better hardware available in 2012 (GS3 with quad-core released in May 2012) ? Knowing what MSFT did to WP7 users and with strict hardware requirements, I sort of want to back out.

Thoughts?

http://forums.windowscentral.com/ge...sion/209809-petition-app-development-wp8.html - Petition for APP development WP8 - head on and read.

 

[spaulagain]

Agile should mean more then once a year.

Hence why we just got an update less than two months after launch. But big updates even more often are rumored to be on the way.

I say "agile" in relation to previous MS products.

 

[brmiller1976]

Have you ever tried to use a 3GS running iOS 4 or 5? It renders the phone all but unusable. Very few apps will run on it.

Buy a new phone when the new OS comes out if you want your phone to work well.

Actually, even the iPhone 4 with iOS 6 is barely usable. Slow and laggy, sometimes to the point of the keyboard missing two or three letters pressed in a row.

 

[BokiV]

Big difference is that wp7.x was based on the wp6.x runtime, and was totally outdated.. I am pretty sure that wp8 hardware is future proof

 

[a5cent]

Big difference is that wp7.x was based on the wp6.x runtime, and was totally outdated.. I am pretty sure that wp8 hardware is future proof

Couldn't be more wrong!

a) Nothing is ever completely future proof. WP8 hardware certainly isn't either.
b) WP7 wasn't executed in a runtime environment! WP7 was layered over an evolved version of Win CE. Nothing about it is outdated, as it continues to be MS's only real time OS. MS continues to offer newer versions of it, currently at 7.0, which has support for 256 cores... more than WP8 supports today BTW.
c) The reasons WP8 didn't come to WP7 hardware has nothing to do with compatibility or not having been future proof. Unfortunately, claiming so is a popular excuse made by many who don't know better. Microsoft has never admitted to such a problem themselves, and never will as it is simply false (see the link in my last post for more on this)

 

[BokiV]

Well of course nothing is COMPLETELY future proof, nor have I stated it anywhere. We are speaking in the context of smartphone market, and for the future, wp8 is at least on pair with their competitors.

Of course Win CE is still supported, its used on millions of devices not related to smartphone market. Again, we are talking about smartphones, not computing on general.

 

[a5cent]

Well of course nothing is COMPLETELY future proof, nor have I stated it anywhere.

You're saying that the technical properties of WP8 devices are "future proof enough", meaning it is safe to assume such devices will run WP9 at some point.

I'm saying WP8 isn't future proof in the sense you are implying, mainly because you (and others) are considering nothing but technical feasibility, when Microsoft must consider far more than just that. In other words, even if WP8 devices are capable of running WP9, it doesn't necessarily mean they will. Microsoft's first ports of the NT kernel ran perfectly well on WP7 hardware, even on 1st generation WP7 hardware. Microsoft could have brought WP8 to WP7 devices if they felt that was in everyone's best interest, but it isn't. Why assume Microsoft will do something different for WP8 and WP9?

Your argument of WP8 being "future proof enough" to run WP9 is the same thing people were saying about WP7 and WP8 a year ago. It wasn't true then and it isn't now.

Of course Win CE is still supported, its used on millions of devices not related to smartphone market.

You do realize that Win CE was engineered precisely for use on devices like smartphones, right? Win CE was installed on millions of smartphones right up to and including WP7. Win CE made it into WP7 precisely because it was BETTER suited for use on smartphones than the NT kernel. The notion that Win CE was dropped due to being outdated or inappropriate for smartphones is utterly wrong... in fact that is almost the opposite of the truth.

My main point is simply that the use of Win CE had nothing to do with the fact that WP8 wasn't made available for WP7 devices, and neither did it have any influence on Microsoft's policy of strict hardware standardization. That policy continues today even without Win CE (at least up until now... I can't guarantee Microsoft will never change that policy).

 

[rockstarzzz]

You're saying that the technical properties of WP8 devices are "future proof enough", meaning it is safe to assume such devices will run WP9 at some point.

I'm saying WP8 isn't future proof in the sense you are implying, mainly because you (and others) are considering nothing but technical feasibility, when Microsoft must consider far more than just that. In other words, even if WP8 devices are capable of running WP9, it doesn't necessarily mean they will. Microsoft's first ports of the NT kernel ran perfectly well on WP7 hardware, even on 1st generation WP7 hardware. Microsoft could have brought WP8 to WP7 devices if they felt that was in everyone's best interest, but it isn't. Why assume Microsoft will do something different for WP8 and WP9?

Your argument of WP8 being "future proof enough" to run WP9 is the same thing people were saying about WP7 and WP8 a year ago. It wasn't true then and it isn't now.



You do realize that Win CE was engineered precisely for use on devices like smartphones, right? Win CE was installed on millions of smartphones right up to and including WP7. Win CE made it into WP7 precisely because it was BETTER suited for use on smartphones than the NT kernel. The notion that Win CE was dropped due to being outdated or inappropriate for smartphones is utterly wrong... in fact that is almost the opposite of the truth.

My main point is simply that the use of Win CE had nothing to do with the fact that WP8 wasn't made available for WP7 devices, and neither did it have any influence on Microsoft's policy of strict hardware standardization. That policy continues today even without Win CE (at least up until now... I can't guarantee Microsoft will never change that policy).

CE to NT would have meant a fresh ROM flash. Lets face it not everyone will do that successfully. Esp when risk of bricked devices is larger against risk of negative PR, Microsoft did the right thing.

But as its been told before, next OS versions are not going to see a kernel change. They will be features and fixes released OTA. When features are hardware dependent,WP8 won't get it.

As far as hardware goes, I don't see what new evolutionary technology will come in two years to not have WP10 on my Lumia.

 

[Morq]

From what I read wp7 was based on some older mobile windows (not sure which one now sorry), while wp8 is based on the same kernel as windows8. It was a huge leap and I think the main reason why they decided to "cut off" from wp7, but I wouldnt worry about them doing this sort of thing anytime soon.
During some conference it was mentioned that each application will have a continued support of X time, where I forgot what X was

 

[Saint Michael]

Oh snap, the Lumia M of 2013 will probably be amazing, but I can't get it, it won't get wp 5278. Damn it!

 

[a5cent]

CE to NT would have meant a fresh ROM flash. Lets face it not everyone will do that successfully.

Hmm... well, actually, every single WP7 update necessitated a ROM flash. The procedure of updating a WP7 device to WP8 would have been no different... hook up Zune... hit update... presto.

The same is true for WP8 of course. The only difference is that the ROM files are distributed OTA instead of through Zune.

The only updates that go through without a ROM flash are those you get from the marketplace/store.

As far as hardware goes, I don't see what new evolutionary technology will come in two years to not have WP10 on my Lumia.

I absolutely agree, but as I previously stated, hardware ability is the least of Microsoft's concerns when deciding whether or not to bring WP9 to WP8 hardware. Hardware capabilities were not of major concern when deciding on whether to bring WP8 to WP7 devices either. Assuming Microsoft's policies haven't changed (I hope they havn't) WP9 won't be coming to WP8 either.

This is all related to Microsoft's strategy of keeping WP a strictly standardized platform (platform = hardware and software).

 

[CoZmicShReddeR]

One Answer Battery Life! Look at the past Android devices and how they literally drained the battery in a few hours or less when being used! That's what you get for not setting a standard! I do not blame Microsoft for this way of thinking. If you wanted to have a phone to do everything why not just walk around with a laptop in your pocket? believe it or not to a lot of people these are just phones and nothing more... I agree with the earlier post regarding user experience! Apple's greatest success is they actually overly consider the user experience with everything and is why they are so reluctant to scrutinize what goes in their App stores! As some of us are Windows Power users both Desktop and Phone we want to push the limits but you cannot have it all if so many others are not that interested in spending more then a few hundred bucks on a new phone upgrade...

I will admit I was one of those guys who always got uptight with OEM's not adding keenest hardware to these mobile devices but over time I have learned I can always just buy out right whatever I wanted just to keep myself amused! I own a Lumia 920 and if I get bored with it I will just buy an Android just for fun because I can and that calms me down about waiting for a new phone release... It's easier for me since I am on AT&T just swap out the sim...

The thing is your never going to be satisfied for very long since the OEMs want you to toss your phone out every 2 years otherwise they loose huge money and of course it's a tug of war effect... We have to upgrade or they stop delivering and either way they are not going to release some mega phone just to make 25% of the market happy when the other 75% doesn't really want to be always charging their phones....

Just my two cents...

 

[generalsu]

One Answer Battery Life! Look at the past Android devices and how they literally drained the battery in a few hours or less when being used! That's what you get for not setting a standard! I do not blame Microsoft for this way of thinking. If you wanted to have a phone to do everything why not just walk around with a laptop in your pocket? believe it or not to a lot of people these are just phones and nothing more... I agree with the earlier post regarding user experience! Apple's greatest success is they actually overly consider the user experience with everything and is why they are so reluctant to scrutinize what goes in their App stores! As some of us are Windows Power users both Desktop and Phone we want to push the limits but you cannot have it all if so many others are not that interested in spending more then a few hundred bucks on a new phone upgrade...

I will admit I was one of those guys who always got uptight with OEM's not adding keenest hardware to these mobile devices but over time I have learned I can always just buy out right whatever I wanted just to keep myself amused! I own a Lumia 920 and if I get bored with it I will just buy an Android just for fun because I can and that calms me down about waiting for a new phone release... It's easier for me since I am on AT&T just swap out the sim...

The thing is your never going to be satisfied for very long since the OEMs want you to toss your phone out every 2 years otherwise they loose huge money and of course it's a tug of war effect... We have to upgrade or they stop delivering and either way they are not going to release some mega phone just to make 25% of the market happy when the other 75% doesn't really want to be always charging their phones....

Just my two cents...

I just hope MS will bring the promise of the 18 months update and support guarantee. Android/HTC support was the worst in the universe. As soon I bought an Android phone, it was out of date 2 weeks later when Android released an incremental update. And because HTC love to customize their darn phones with HTC Sense (to the point where it isn't Android anymore), they weren't going to port their beauty over to the latest Android OS. Plus, Android is a bloated, slow and laggy OS that does not put UI as priority. This is the reason why Android phones now use Quad Core CPUs compare the Duo Cores used in WP8 phones. WP8 is simply more efficient and optimized compared to Android.

Besides the excellent Google Maps, why would anyone want to upgrade to the latest Android device?

 

[Taiger78]

If MS sets the upper limit of hardware, does this also include max MP of camera, is that the reason to why Nokia only put 8.7MP camera in 920 compared to the 41MP in the 808.
I always thought that it was due to WP7/8 limitation, and not supporting that high MP

 

[SomethingSomethingDarkSide]

If MS sets the upper limit of hardware, does this also include max MP of camera, is that the reason to why Nokia only put 8.7MP camera in 920 compared to the 41MP in the 808.
I always thought that it was due to WP7/8 limitation, and not supporting that high MP

the form factor & cost associated with the 41mp sensor was probably the major factors