* Posts by Richard Plinston

2608 publicly visible posts • joined 27 Apr 2009

Microsoft: Surface is DEAD. Long live the Surface 2!

Richard Plinston

Re: How much an Ultrabook costs?

> a sub-optimal angle (and is precariously balanced) due to the kickstand.

The 2nd position will give a better angle, _BUT_ the additional distance will move the kickstand beyond the knees and/or not leave enough room for the keyboard.

Ex-CEO Elop's plunder to total $25m in voyage from Nokia to Microsoft

Richard Plinston

Re: yawn...

> Everyone who invested in Nokia made out with a lot of money because they were all investing when it was at rock bottom.

You seem to think that there were no shareholders before Elop came on board.

Lots of investors dropped a bundle when the shares fell to 1/3 their value. The rise from 'rock bottom' is small compared to that.

Windows Phone overtakes Apple's market share ... in India

Richard Plinston

Re: Trolls

>> The difference is that Google succeeds, not because there is no alternative, but because ...

> You are implying that Microsoft only succeeded because there was no alternative in the same sentence that you're pointing out that one of the alternatives succeeded.

Microsoft succeeded _on_the_desktop_ and from _the_mid_90s_ because they eliminated the alternatives by various means. Such as illegal per-box pricing, vapourware, buying and killing application providers, bundling, and paying OEMs (via 'loyalty' discounts and direct payments) to _not_ offer or install alternatives.

Microsoft initially ignored the internet (in the first edition of 'The Road Ahead' there was no mention of the internet) and then tried to side line it with the original MSN which was a private network for Windows 95 users. They hoped to kill the internet and replace it under MS control. They gave away IE to kill Netscape (and killed Spyglass too).

Google became a large company in a quite different market by providing services that people wanted. For example in search it was Microsoft that tried to be an alternative to Google by configuring Windows machines to default to Bing and making it difficult to change, and by taking over Yahoo!'s search engine (Yahoo had earlier bought and killed Alta Vista).

Richard Plinston

Re: Trolls

> that you don't see Google becoming the new Microsoft....

If Google was like Microsoft it would buy Jolla and strangle it, threaten Samsung until Tizen was abandonned, and would never have let anyone use Android without Google services.

The difference is that Google succeeds, not because there is no alternative, but because Google provides better products that people want.

City of Munich throws Ubuntu lifeline to Windows XP holdouts

Richard Plinston

Re: Linux, fine - but why Ubuntu?

> UI that has zero resemblance to XP's user interface.

Ubuntu has several UIs. Just click on KDE, XFCE, Gnome or others on the Software Centre. You can select the one that you want when you login to the system.

Richard Plinston

Re: Optional @AC 12:35/13:07

> As per the recent HP study, Munich would have saved €43.7 million if it had stuck with Microsoft....

The 'HP' study was funded by Microsoft and has not been fully released so that the figures could be checked.

It is simply a work of fiction.

http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Microsoft-partly-releases-study-on-Munich-s-Linux-migration-1792733.html

http://jan.wildeboer.net/2013/01/that-hpmicrosoft-study-on-the-linux-migration-in-munich-hm/

Richard Plinston

Re: What's wrong with LiMux?

> That doesn't allow for the ten years of migration costs,

Yes it does. That is what 'saving' is all about - fewer costs than the alternate. They were on Windows NT and so would have had to allow for migration costs to _something_ whether that be XP (and then again to Win7) or to Linux. Also the saving will continue to grow as they no longer send money to Redmond, or is that Ireland so MS don't have to clip tax out of it ?

> It clearly has been a massive failure

It clearly was a massive failure of Ballmer. He couldn't throw enough chairs to stop it going ahead. But Munich say it is a success, who are you to say they are wrong ?

I do know that Microsoft paid for an 'independent' report that claimed the costs were higher, but that did not include licence costs to MS (about $7million) plus many other false claims.

http://techrights.org/2013/01/24/anti-munich-pr/

> the rumoured €30 million that IBM spent on the project.

Was that _rumour_ started by Microsoft or by you ?

"""By the end of 2011 the program had exceeded its goal and changed over 9000 desktops to Linux.[11] The city of Munich reported at the end of 2012 that the migration to Linux was highly successful and has already saved the city over €11 million (US$14 million)."""

Richard Plinston

Re: Nice idea, but...(perhaps try Win7 instead of XP??)

> Win 7 finds everything you can throw at it,

Win 7 will find 'everything' on a machine that is modern enough to run it. If it is attempted to install on a machine too old or with inadequate resources where it _can't_ find everything then it may refuse to install. If it is installed on a machine that has components newer than the Win 7 build then you may have to search for matching drivers.

I don't know whether you are overly optimistic or just naive.

Richard Plinston

Re: Nice idea, but...

> 1) As the op said, the fact that there are countless different versions of it. Ask for an opinion of which one to install and you'll get as many different answers ...

It's a wonder that there is just one car maker with just one model. It must be really confusing for car buyers with so much choice and so much conflicting advice. And then they come in different colours.

At least with cars they come free and you can discard them and try a different one. Oh wait ..

Apple to uncloak new iPads, iMacs at October 15 event?

Richard Plinston

Re: @Steven Raith 2013-09-16 22:03 Can't Cook.. Stupid Cook..

> With a x86 PC at least you could say that a program can run on many other various variations of this platform.

When x86 computers first came out they were all significantly different. Some were S100 bus systems, others were single board, others boxed in different ways. The IBM PC was just another way of doing this. They could all run CP/M-86 or MS-DOS because the makers wrote an appropriate BIOS (even MS-DOS on IBM-PC had a stub loadable BIOS that interacted with the ROM BIOS) and other drivers.

Certainly the IBM PC ROM BIOS eventually became the standard way to build x86 computers but this took some years (while you may have been in nappies, perhaps).

The only reason that a 'program can run on many other various variations of this platform' is because it became (mostly) one platform. However there are many variations that will stop a program running such as variations in x86 CPUs: 8088, 80186, 80286, 80386, 80486, Pentium, PII, AMD_64 in many varieties.

What caters for compatibility is the BIOS and the drivers.

With ARM it is just the same. However, in general, the manufacturer's drivers are built into their version of the system and are not separately available. But then that can be true of x86 systems too.

One day we'll look back and say this was the end of the software platform

Richard Plinston

Re: History repeating

> If you send somebody a Word/Excel/PowerPoint document,

It is not primarily the format that is the problem it is the "send somebody a ... document" that causes the problem.

Why would anyone do that (apart from sheer laziness) ? If you want to send them something to read then it should be a PDF or similar so they can't change it. If you want them to change it then it should be done on a _shared_ copy (Office352 or Google Docs or similar), then several can access and revise it when allowed to and control is not lost.

The real problem is that .doc and .docx are likely to have additional data, such as deleted text, that should not be sent to a reader.

Richard Plinston

Who has the 90% ?

"Apple and Samsung have 90 per cent of the smartphone market."

No, that is just not true. Apple and _Android_ have 90% - in round figures: Apple 20%, Android 70%, but Samsung has only half of the 70%. There are several makers of Android with around 5%: Huawei, Sony, ZTE plus many smaller.

BING! Microsoft plants Xbox Music flagpoles in Android and iOS

Richard Plinston

Re: Admission of Windows Phone failure

> Never understood why WP's 5% is a "failure"

First of all WP's global market share is around 3.5%. The reason it is a 'failure' is that MS used to have over 40% of the smartphone market. It has declined in spite of new models and new OSes and versions and despite billions in subsidies and losses. It seems to be selling only because of pricing where this needs to be about 15% higher merely to not make a loss.

OS X may only be 6% of the market but it makes Apple more revenue and profit than Microsoft or Dell.

Finns, roamers, Nokia: So long, and thanks for all the phones

Richard Plinston

Re: Rotting at the head

> The N9 was the first phone

You hadn't heard of the N900 then, nor the N950 which was supposed to be released about the same time as the N9 but was canned by Elop.

Richard Plinston

Re: Rotting at the head

> As for Nokias adventure into Linux, good but awfully slow, slower than slow

Complete nonsense. I don't know what you were trying to do with them but they are fine. I developed applications for the N800 with Python/Glade/SQLite and a couple of thousand product images for sales reps and it ran fast. The code also ran unchanged on Linux netbooks and Windows Laptops and there was little to tell them apart in performance.

I still use my N800 to take notes and to run Gnumeric. No performance issues at all.

Richard Plinston

Re: Nokia couldn't make a smartphone because it was too focused on the phone side.

> Nokia was a phone company and tried to add other features to phones, not add phone features to handhelds PC,

You are misinformed. Nokia had the N770 handheld PC in 2005 which was updated to the N800, N810 and N810 WiMax. The next model, the N900, added phone features. This developed into the N9 and the N950, both of which were canned by Elop because they made WP look very poor.

I still use my N800 and it runs Abiword and Gnumeric when required.

Microsoft's VDI deals make Windows Server cheapest desktop OS

Richard Plinston

Re: simpler to move to FLOSS?

> there was *197 kernels supported*

It is your lack of understanding of what is meant by 'supported'. It means that the company has tested it on those and they will accept support questions.

In much the same way some software is _supported_ on certain versions of Windows with particular updates and service packs. It doesn't mean that it won't run on others, only that the company does not test on those and may not be able to provide answers.

Richard Plinston

Re: simpler to move to FLOSS?

> I can't think of one replacement to

Your inability to think is not a limitation on alternate software.

Windows 8.1 to freeze out small business apps

Richard Plinston

Re: let me get this right...

> Win8 has exactly the same support costs and requirements as Win7.

For those currently running Win 7 there is an additional cost in Windows 8 of the rollout, all the retraining required, plus the (claimed by some) loss of productivity brought about by having TIFKAM.

So for those currently on Windows 7 there is additional costs, including ongoing costs, in moving to Windows 8 as compared to staying with Windows 7 (or XP).

Chrome turns five, gains new 'desktop apps'

Richard Plinston

> Although it's most often associated with Apple it was powering the Symbian browser as early as 2005

Webkit started as a fork of KHTML which started in 1998 as KDE's HTML layout engine.

Microsoft, Nokia and the sound of colliding garbage trucks

Richard Plinston

Re: @LDS

> But Google main business *is selling you and your data*, while at least MS makes money selling software.

And Microsoft's Bing main business is: *is selling you and your data*.

It is just that they don't do it as well and consequently run it at a loss. But they still do that.

Richard Plinston

> Microsoft just bought a growing phone business that is

Actually there is another reason that MS bought Nokia. The exclusive deal for WP is due to be 'renegotiated' in 2014. The WP only deal has brought Nokia nothing but losses and a _shrinking_ business. It is entirely possible that the board was considering several options: dump the phone business; go back to Maemo/Meego/Sailfish or Android/Ubuntu; sell off to Lenovo. Any of those would be a complete fail for WP and MS. The MS buyout was facesaving before any other consideration.

> projected to claim the #3 position in the smart phone market this year and that currently holds a solid grip on the #2 position in the overall phone market.

Currently #2, projected #3 ? In that case Android is #0 and Apple #1.

From IDC today: "IDC predict that Windows Phone won’t reach a double-digit share of the global smartphone market until 2017, when it will account for 10.2% of all smartphones shipped"

> in reality all phone manufacturers except Apple and Samsung are doing much worse in terms of market share, growth, margins, and profits.

Nokia phone division has made a loss consistently in spite of getting 1billion a year from MS. Several companies outsell Nokia WP but they are lumped into the 'Android' 7.5% market share which effectively hides the fact. For example Huawei, Sony and ZTE all have a bigger global smartphone market share (4.2 - 4.9% than Nokia's WP share (3%).

Second-gen Surface and Surface Pro rumored to be minor upgrades

Richard Plinston

> I think there is a long game being played with RT, I'm not sure what yet.

Yes, there is. It is to wave 'loyalty discounts!' at OEMs to prevent them making ARM based stuff* with a non-Microsoft OS.

It worked well at HP and WebOS, but only for a short time. HP have now realised they can make Android tablets and lose less money than if they made RT tablets.

* This includes ARM based servers when MS work out how to do those, but then having hundreds of ARM SoCs in a server (as they do) will price Windows RT Server Edition out of the market.

Richard Plinston

"""the new ARM version would simply be called Surface, dropping the previous generation's "RT" moniker."""

That will certainly change the buyer confusion over which model does what. They have just learned to avoid the 'RT' models and now they won't see any.

iPhone rises, Android slips in US, UK

Richard Plinston

Re: Windows "performance"

> When the third is still gaining market share at over 70% a year,

WP did grow by 77% in _unit_sales_ in Q2 over 2012 Q2 (probably due to dumping the remaining WP7 models into the bargain bin and selling some newer models at a loss). However the market increased by 51% so the effective _market_share_ gain was from 3.1% to 3.7%.

Your statement is completely untrue, either you deliberately lie to boost MS or you don't understand anything about the market.

> and most analysts believe it will get to at least 2nd place, yes..

Many analysts _did_ claim that - a couple of years ago. The _current_ prediction is that WP will get to third and may get to 10% globally by 2016 or maybe later. Do try and keep up and read something more recent than 2011.

But given the rate of change of their predictions the next prediction will maybe that WP will get to 5% by 2018.

Richard Plinston

Re: The lumia range sure beat Android landfill

> are the right price

They may be the 'right price' to sell, but they are _not_ the right price to make a profit for the manufacturer. Nokia make a large loss on their smartphones in spite of getting a billion dollars a year from Microsoft.

They have been sold at a loss to build market share, but this has driven other WP makers out of the market. When real prices are applied sales will drop. If MS continues with loss making pricing then not only will this annoy the OEMs but will result in the EEC looking into it.

Nokia drives cars into the clouds: Hear HERE, you're here, hear?

Richard Plinston

Re: @dogged Too bad

> That's like saying that a car that can do 200mph is better than one that can't because it can, even though you will never use it.

Actually that is likely to be true, for certain connotations of 'better'. In order to be able to do 200mph it must have suspension, tires and bearings capable of withstanding those speeds, carefully crafted aerodynamics, and must pass safety tests.

Of course it is likely to be useless for going to the supermarket, but that wasn't what it is 'better' at.

> My point is that it is irrational to assume that somebody lovely and friendly is checking the code for you.

The fact that the code _can_ be checked is incentive to ensure that backdoors and 'phone homes' are not added. There are also _thousands_ of contributors who _are_ checking code and who have no affiliation.

> more checkins to the linux kernel are made from @microsoft.com addresses than any other domain,

You do spout a load of rubbish:

"""According to The Linux Foundation, this is "the first time, Microsoft appears on list of companies that are contributing to the Linux kernel. Ranking at number 17"""

As far as I can tell this contribution was a one-off to supports MS's Hyper-V so that it can sell Windows Server running on Linux boxes and can run Linux on Windows Sever. This is to sell Windows, not to help Linux.

> religious lunatics on El Reg go on about Microsoft's shitty code

I don't think that anyone has commented on code _quality_, it is unlikely they would pass a judgement on code they haven't seen. They do, however, comment on known areas, such as the existence of backdoors and 'phoning home'.

What Surface RT flop? Nokia said to be readying WinRT slab for September

Richard Plinston

Re: I am not really sure why windows RT exists

>> You may sneer, but [the iPad] is what many people want.

> No-one's denying that for a second, and I'm not actually sneering. I merely reminded you that consumption is not the purpose of Windows RT, or certainly not the sole purpose.

You were sneering by calling the iPad a 'portable telly' when it is just as capable of producing content and being used as a terminal to central servers as RT is. It may be that the keyboards are third party (which means choice and flexibility) and the software is different.

I also find that the 16:9 screen of Surface is targetted more at watching movies than producing A4 documents, especially when it is stuck in landscape by its keyboard and stand. A 4:3 screen is much more usable for content creation and is particularly so when it can be put into landscape or portrait mode when word processing and clipped into the keyboard/cover/stand combination that are available to suit the various users' needs.

It RT was intended to be used for content creation then Microsoft has done a very poor job.

Richard Plinston

Re: I am not really sure why windows RT exists

>> Why would any server be running a GUI, let alone a touch based one that gives apps the full screen or just 2 or 3 splits?

> So you can administer it from a tablet device, obviously.

I have been able to administer my servers remotely, using a tablet even, for years and they _don't_ run GUI at all. They run WebMin (available since 1997) accessible by any browser, even a phone (as long as it is allowed in the config).

Richard Plinston

Re: I am not really sure why windows RT exists

> They're hardly selling at PC levels, are they?

The latest IDC forecasts for whole of 2013 global markets:

Desktop PCs: 134m Mobile PCs (laptops): 181m

Tablets: 227m Smartphones: 918m.

So, Yes, they are.

> Even with the alleged "death of the PC", the tablet market is a minnow by profit comparison and the iPad doesn't even rule that.

Apple's gross margin is around 40%. Significantly higher than PC vendors.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/04/15/pc-gross-margins-expected-to-decline-as-sales-shrink-dell-goes-private

> It's a portable telly. A consumer device for consumers to consume stuff with. Not what Windows RT was intended for.

You may sneer, but it is what many people want. It already has, as does Android, sufficiently capable apps for 'Office' type functionality and can connect to web based solutions or use RDP, VNC and many others.

Windows RT is just a 'me too' as MS tries to be an Apple 'me too'.

Richard Plinston

Re: Plumbing new depths

> Better picture quality generally calls for a larger sensor,

It is not just the size in terms of megapixels, but also the physical size of each pixel. While the 1020 has a larger sensor than most phones and many compacts the pixel site size is smaller.

> which is why Nokia probably ditched optical zoom because fixed optics for a large sensor would be large enough and zoom would only make things bigger.

Yes, the Samsung zoom has a collapsing zoom lens, but that is why it is a much better camera.

> I know my Canon 18-55 kit lens is not the best

Then you are probably better off with a quality compact than lugging around a big DSLR with a poor lens.

> Not to mention Facebook will probably mangle the photo anyway, and very few people will be taking photos that their mates will want to look at 1:1.

Then they don't need a 'pureview', any old phone camera will do for facebook.

> If Samsung can produce good quality optical zoom that doesn't have mechanical issues, I'll be very impressed.

Samsung have 11.8% of the world digital camera market, they are not new to making cameras of all types.

Richard Plinston

Re: I am not really sure why windows RT exists

> if you write for WinRT you can address any implementation of Windows, be it Server, 8.x or RT.

Why would any server be running a GUI, let alone a touch based one that gives apps the full screen or just 2 or 3 splits?

> (unlike the iPad which is basically a portable telly if you're going to be honest)

That must be why they are selling so poorly.

> show that Windows doesn't actually need a desktop in order to do stuff, including content creation.

Office RT uses the desktop Win32 API and not TIFKAM. Office works poorly (according to reviews) with touch, it needs the keyboard and mouse/touchpad to be useful. This then requires that it be set on a firm surface such as a desktop. That's a failure then.

> $900 million is a lot of money for a prototype,

That figure was just the partial writedown on approx 6million devices. When Surface 2 is announced then these will be written down again or written off for more hundreds of millions.

> but that's what Windows RT boxes are. A prototype.

'Prototypes' are made in small numbers. I am sure that actual prototypes did exist, perhaps in several different forms. Making several million 'prototypes' would be major incompetence.

Richard Plinston

Re: Plumbing new depths

> They are really good - best camera on any phone

Do try and keep up. That may have been true of the 808 a couple of years ago, but you obviously haven't heard of Samsung's Zoom.

Optical Zoom always trumps digital zoom.

"""Camera

Primary 16 MP, autofocus, Xenon flash

Features 1/2.33'' sensor size, geo-tagging, touch focus, face and smile detection, 10x optical zoom (24-240mm), optical image stabilization, HDR, panorama

Video Yes, 1080p@30fps"""

Overall the Nokia 1020 (and only this model) is slightly better for some things than an iPhone, and slightly worse in some tests:

http://www.techradar.com/news/phone-and-communications/mobile-phones/iphone-5-vs-lumia-1020-vs-olympus-e-pl5-1174823/2#articleContent

Richard Plinston

Re: I am not really sure why windows RT exists

>> "That software is unsuitable for touch and requires keyboard and mouse"

> Erm - but Surface RT has full USB support - it supports 400 million devices out of the box!....Including....USB keyboards and mice!

Sure, keyboards and mice can be attached, as they can with most other tablets too. But the desktop based software is most useful with, and probably _requires_, keyboard and mouse. So the task is done better with a laptop with a bigger screen - and that may be cheaper too.

Richard Plinston

Re: You cannot be Sirius maaaaaan

>> "Now is the time to bring Nokia's reputation for quality hardware to Android"

>Then Nokia would loose any differentiation.

Exactly, there are already plenty of quality hardware devices running Android, so no differentiation.

> Windows Phone is much more secure than Android, and requires less resources - Nokia are already winning corporate business from Blackberry - and low end Windows Phone handsets completely outperform landfill Android....

WP7 would run on low end hardware, but actually it would _only_ run on low end because its CE base did not support multi-core or multitasking. By tombstoning apps it reduced the processing required, but then users missed out on background tasks that others could run.

WP8 _requires_ dual-core, so these are not 'low-end' and may well 'outperform' single-core Androids that have a lower MHz or less RAM.

Richard Plinston

Re: Does Nokia have a plan to make Win RT not suck?

> Well it's certainly a more powerful and secure OS than IOS or Android. It could have a future.

In what way is it 'more powerful' ? What exactly does it do that cannot be done on iOS or Android ?

More secure ? Only because no one bothers to attack it yet.

> It just needs the apps (although it does come with a full version of Office....)

It is not a 'full version'. It is a 'student and home' version, and there are many bits missing.

Richard Plinston

Re: I am not really sure why windows RT exists

> Windows RT is a thin client but has built in lightweight applications, like those old green screen terminals with built in calculator.

Nice try, but wrong.

The only RT products so far are touch tablets with 10inch screens. These would be completely unsuitable for running existing desktop software (actually running on a server). That software is unsuitable for touch and requires keyboard and mouse. 10inch is too small for desktop software where pixel level mouse accuracy is required. Any on-screen keyboard would get in the way of the input areas - because the software is not designed to work that way. Attaching a keyboard means its just a too small laptop (and Surface won't be used on a lap - it just doesn't work at that).

Richard Plinston

Re: You cannot be Sirius maaaaaan

> There must be a better way. Where can I read about the N9, what will its successor be?

http://jolla.com/

Richard Plinston

> I am not really sure why windows RT exists

Windows on ARM and RT are to wave at the OEMs in order to remove their 'loyalty discount' on _all_ products if they build an ARM tablet with a different OS.

It worked for a while with HP and WebOS, but OEMs are now ignoring the threat because RT is a failure.

Richard Plinston

Re: re: Whatever is brewing in Nokia's Espoo headquarters

You should note that it is no longer _Nokia's_ headquarters, they sold it and leased it back so their losses didn't look so bad (in the short term).

Look out ARM, Intel, here comes MIPS – again

Richard Plinston

Re: New lamps for old

> if the car industry had gone the same way the microprocessor industry has gone ...

Cars would go 1000mph, would travel 500miles on a pint of fuel, and would be 2inches long.

Thought the PC market couldn't get any worse? HAH! Think again

Richard Plinston

Re: People may dislike Windows 8...

> If. You had actually read what the guy said you would have noticed that he was talking about desktop distros.

He didn't restrict the 'Windows 8' to desktop PCs, the implication was that it covered laptops and tablets.

Tablets and smartphones are the new 'Personal Computers' and desktop systems are being relegated to be servers or specialized workstations for CAD, video editing, programming and such.

In the mid 80 you could still claim that there were more mainframe computers - but only if you dismissed the PCs as not worth counting.

So we are now to accept that Android is a Linux distro.. There is now widespread Malware problems on Android..Does this mean the end of endless comments about how secure Linux is as there are no Linux viruses?

The malware on Android are primarily not 'viruses'. They are mainly Trojans. Computers do not protect against user stupidity.

Richard Plinston

Re: People may dislike Windows 8...

> Windows 8 may be/is crap but it's still more widely used than all the Linux distros combined.

Android is a Linux distro.

(it may not be a GNU/Linux distro, but it has Linux kernel just like all the others)

Richard Plinston

Re: Surely it's becoming apparent

> Which is great until you:

Going to the theatre with printed tickets in your wallet is great until you:

a: Lose your wallet

b: Leave it in your other trousers

c: Wallet is stolen.

Richard Plinston

Re: @JDX

> Doing any form of serious writing, drawing, CAD, 3D graphics, music composition and recording, coding, video editing and so on needs a full blown machine.

Shifting containers, house removals, delivering to supermarkets, and so on needs big trucks. Cars and bikes just won't do those jobs.

Delta Air Lines makes mass Windows Phone 8, Lumia 820 buy

Richard Plinston

> Many industry analysts say that Windows Phone is likely to ...

In 2011 Gartner predicted that WP would sell 68million phones in 2012 for a 10.8% market share. How good was that prediction ?

http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/2011/04/07/gartner-windows-phone-will-overtake-iphone-blackberry-by-2015/

In mid 2011 IDC predicted that in 2015 WP would overtake iOS

http://wmpoweruser.com/idc-maintains-windows-phone-7-to-overtake-iphone-in-2015-prediction/

By the end of 2012 IDC had dropped this to predict WP to have half Apple's share by 2016.

http://wmpoweruser.com/idc-predicts-11-4-smartphone-market-share-for-windows-phone-in-2016/

At this rate of change in prediction by next year they will predict a 3% share for WP by 2020.

The real problem is that Nokia sells most WP phones at a loss plus they are subsidized by MS, effectively they pay nothing for the software. It may build market share but eventually they will have to try to make a profit.

Richard Plinston

> O2 are also likely to switch to Windows Phone and apparently HSBC are considering it.

How many drinks trolleys do they have ?

Richard Plinston

It's a phone ?

Won't it have to be switched off during flight ?

Waiting for a Windows Phone update? Let's talk again next year

Richard Plinston

Re: Stuck on WP 7.x

> I suspect the OEMs weren't willing to put in the effort - if it was even possible - to bring up WP8 on their old hardware.

It wasn't possible. Microsoft developed WP7 for a small range of specific SoCs, all single core because that was all CE could support. WP8 was developed for a completely different set of dual core SoCs, WP8 requires dual core.

As only binary is delivered to the OEMs for certain essential parts of the system they cannot change it to use WP7 SoCs nor to more modern or better SoCs. They are stuck with what MS dictates while other makers bring out newer/better/cheaper devices.

Richard Plinston

Just like the last 'platform update' ?

"""Windows Phone owners must wait until next spring for a major platform update,"""

WM6x owners and developers were looking forward to the '7' update. WP7 owners and developers were looking forward to the 'Apollo' (WP8) update.

Will this new update throw them on the trash heap again ?