Related
My reasons why I think Windows Phone 7 fail. I'm not here to profess my love for Apple, Google, Linux, Open Source or Nokia. Rather I'm here to present simple facts and problems that could be bad for the platform.
Windows Phone 7 lacks CDMA support: Why? So your going to tell many of the thousands of Verizon Wireless, Sprint, US Cellular Users, MetroPCs cellphone users well I'm glad you were excited about Windows Phone 7 but sorry no handset for you.
It Cost's Money: Why would a phone manufacturer pay to use a platform that is very immature, when you could easily make a device that has a mature platform like Android or Symbian without paying a licensing to use the OS.
Hardware Requirements prevent it from reaching low end markets: Well requiring basic thing like Accelerometer with compass, ambient light sensor, proximity sensor, 5mp camera, shutterbutton, and Assisted GPS etc is perfectly acceptable but requiring a 1ghz processor will raise hardware costs and will prevent low end and midrange phone users from buying Windows Phone 7 devices.
Windows Mobile 6.5 has little marketshare and the Microsoft Kin Was a Huge Failure: Why would smarthphone manufacturers want to create a phone with Windows Phone 7 when Windows Mobile 6.5 in its current form has much less then competitors 6-8 percent and the failure of the Microsoft shows has little understanding of the mobile marketplace.
I don't mean to cause hate I was just giving Windows Phone 7 valid criticism. Please leave your thoughts down below.
Your criticism is wellcomed here. But I gonna criticize your criticism.
CDMA Support will come. 6months after the release of the GSM version. The Iphone is huge and is only on one carrier, a gsm carrier at that, did CMDA hurt it. The first US Android device was the Tmobile G1. It was the only Android device for a while, and again launched on a GSM carrier, but look Android is huge now.. Also the main market MS is aiming at is the Euro/Asia Market which is mostly GSM. So you think about smart move or not?
It cost money? The top selling Android phones are all premium devices. They're sold at $199 on each carrier. If price is a bad, thing how did the Iphone become so popular? Those specs MS chose are to keep a quality control on the hardware so devs can fully utilitize the hardware. If MS used lower specs than devs would have to support the least common denominator and the app won't be as optimized.
Yes WM6.5 wasn't successful, but there are reasons behind that fragmentation and LOW SPECS. The kin was a failure from the beginning since it took away MS resource and time away from WP7. WM6.5 and the Kin didn't have the features that WP7 has, nor did they have the dev support that WP7 is receiving which is what will make it successful.
juliusaugustus said:
My reasons why I think Windows Phone 7 fail. I'm not here to profess my love for Apple, Google, Linux, Open Source or Nokia. Rather I'm here to present simple facts and problems that could be bad for the platform.
Windows Phone 7 lacks CDMA support: Why? So your going to tell many of the thousands of Verizon Wireless, Sprint, US Cellular Users, MetroPCs cellphone users well I'm glad you were excited about Windows Phone 7 but sorry no handset for you.
It Cost's Money: Why would a phone manufacturer pay to use a platform that is very immature, when you could easily make a device that has a mature platform like Android or Symbian without paying a licensing to use the OS.
Hardware Requirements prevent it from reaching low end markets: Well requiring basic thing like Accelerometer with compass, ambient light sensor, proximity sensor, 5mp camera, shutterbutton, and Assisted GPS etc is perfectly acceptable but requiring a 1ghz processor will raise hardware costs and will prevent low end and midrange phone users from buying Windows Phone 7 devices.
Windows Mobile 6.5 has little marketshare and the Microsoft Kin Was a Huge Failure: Why would smarthphone manufacturers want to create a phone with Windows Phone 7 when Windows Mobile 6.5 in its current form has much less then competitors 6-8 percent and the failure of the Microsoft shows has little understanding of the mobile marketplace.
I don't mean to cause hate I was just giving Windows Phone 7 valid criticism. Please leave your thoughts down below.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My thought is don't judge a thing before it is released...
For your CDMA support point, did Iphone and Android release CDMA phone when they are launched. NO, why? This a basic business or economic knowledge, since WP7 is new product and GSM still the priority. Microsoft has to see how consumers respond to their concept, CDMA definitely will be supported soon.
Yeah...Of course,it cost money, but this is depends how the manufacturers deal with Microsoft. For example, Microsoft might offer a very low price to manufacturers to use their operating system or Manufacturer foresee the future vale of WP7. Furthermore, these big companies got many financial analyzers.This is what you no need worry about it.Lastly, What consumers want to see is the actual price of the handset and the actual values it brought to us.
Regarding the low end market, of course, Microsoft is conducting product-differentiation strategy, thats why they did'n aim the low end market. Furthermore, the required hardwares are to ensure to user experiences. For example, Comparing HTC Tattoo and HTC evo. If you bought Tattoo, most users definitely will blame the android OS but not the hardwares, because not everyone in the world is tech-geek. In contrast, the handset you bought is HTC evo, you definitely will feel that is awesome, no laggy,smooth, fast, great resolution.
Regarding the Microsoft Kin, what I predict is, but not confirmed, Microsoft try to observe the consumer spending behaviour and handphone demand, but not try to earn the profit. For instance, the advertisement fees on KIN, I can say it is extremely low. Furthermore, KIN just open for US market. Lastly, Microsoft can cut down the production of this phone so fast and quick with minimal lost. So, you can see that maybe they already plan to cut down the procution at the beginning. And they are preparing something big at the backstage...which is WP7...
When you comparing WM6 and WP7 is completely wrong, because this two OSes are completely different, in term of UI, functionalities and etc.....Everyone knows that the WM6 market share is extremely low now. In my opinion, this is what Microsoft done wrong, back in few years ago, WM6 still dominate the Smartphone market so called monopoly, and Microsoft didn't realised the threat of new entrants such as android and iOS. In addition, Microsoft focused more on PC OS.
Lastly, I just hope don't judge something before you try or use...
Cheers...
you know there is life outside USA and it's 95% GSM network running world out there...
I think more than the licensing fees and hardware limitations, WP7 will be capped by a messaging and features challenge.
How do you convince the average smartphone user to get a WP7 device instead of an iPhone or Android handset? WP7's UI is different, but it's not necessarily compelling. WP7 might have integrated FB status updates in the People hub, but for full FB functions, you'd have to have an FB app anyway. I'm skeptical that people will be convinced of the alleged "at a glance" experience of WP7 (the WM6 Today screen, for that matter, gave much more info at a glance but had to be hidden by every OEM).
Xbox Live score/achievement integration is the only real differentiator, but that only matters to Xbox gamers, and even when it comes to gaming, the iPhone has WP7 handily beat with several games that have real-time local + online multiplayer support (something WP7 does not support).
Gaming graphics are not going to be a big one either, as the iPhone has dozens of first-rate 3D games, and given that all first-gen WP7 devices will have the aging first-gen Snapdragon chip (MSM8250 @ 1 GHz), the iPhone 3GS, 4, and many Android devices have more powerful GPUs in any case.
Zune integration doesn't appeal to average users (just look at Zune's market share). Average consumers will see WP7 as being similar to Android in that it doesn't sync with iTunes. The alternative may be there (Zune for WP7, Amazon and others for Android), but from an initial purchase standpoint, they're thinking about iTunes or no iTunes.
WP7 has no killer app on the business front either, with such a limited Office experience (Word/Excel/etc. can make only rudimentary changes to documents, compared to much richer 3rd party editing apps on the iPhone), no Outlook sync support (for offices that don't use Exchange), and an Exchange ActiveSync experience not terribly different from the iPhone's or Android's. I think MS' marketing push highlighting Xbox Live integration will also hurt WP7 on the business credibility front.
amb9800 said:
I think more than the licensing fees and hardware limitations, WP7 will be capped by a messaging and features challenge.
How do you convince the average smartphone user to get a WP7 device instead of an iPhone or Android handset? WP7's UI is different, but it's not necessarily compelling. WP7 might have integrated FB status updates in the People hub, but for full FB functions, you'd have to have an FB app anyway. I'm skeptical that people will be convinced of the alleged "at a glance" experience of WP7 (the WM6 Today screen, for that matter, gave much more info at a glance but had to be hidden by every OEM).
Xbox Live score/achievement integration is the only real differentiator, but that only matters to Xbox gamers, and even when it comes to gaming, the iPhone has WP7 handily beat with several games that have real-time local + online multiplayer support (something WP7 does not support).
Gaming graphics are not going to be a big one either, as the iPhone has dozens of first-rate 3D games, and given that all first-gen WP7 devices will have the aging first-gen Snapdragon chip (MSM8250 @ 1 GHz), the iPhone 3GS, 4, and many Android devices have more powerful GPUs in any case.
Zune integration doesn't appeal to average users (just look at Zune's market share). Average consumers will see WP7 as being similar to Android in that it doesn't sync with iTunes. The alternative may be there (Zune for WP7, Amazon and others for Android), but from an initial purchase standpoint, they're thinking about iTunes or no iTunes.
WP7 has no killer app on the business front either, with such a limited Office experience (Word/Excel/etc. can make only rudimentary changes to documents, compared to much richer 3rd party editing apps on the iPhone), no Outlook sync support (for offices that don't use Exchange), and an Exchange ActiveSync experience not terribly different from the iPhone's or Android's. I think MS' marketing push highlighting Xbox Live integration will also hurt WP7 on the business credibility front.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For the game on windows phone 7,i never worry about this...please go over here and have a lookhttp://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/phone/default.htm...XBOX live integration is not only for XBOX anymore. What Microsoft try to do is create a platform for gamers, like what has bee appeared in iphone,GAME CENTRE and PLUS+...
I think ZUNE integration would be a killer...try the ZUNE software herehttp://www.zune.net/en-us/products/software/download/default.htm
Even, you didn't own a ZUNE, you can use it too. Now ZUNE player already my default music and movie player. It's great and awesome, especially finding album arts, great graphic and etc...Furthermore, what I like is I can play any song in my PC without convert or create a new datastore to store the converted music...and ITUNES did this.omg, it wastes my hard drive spaces.About the market share, same situation again...ZUNE is just for sales in US market. Therefore, can't compare it with itunes store....
However, I might be wrong...Just stay tuned...WP7 gonna launch in this month...
Cheers...
sylau90 said:
For the game on windows phone 7,i never worry about this...please go over here and have a lookhttp://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/phone/default.htm...XBOX live integration is not only for XBOX anymore. What Microsoft try to do is create a platform for gamers, like what has bee appeared in iphone,GAME CENTRE and PLUS+...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But that's precisely the problem. What does WP7 offer casual phone gamers that the iPhone doesn't? The iPhone has a large existing game library, multiplayer support, more powerful graphics hardware than all WP7 launch phones, and now even some of the score/achievement tracking that Xbox Live offers.
sylau90 said:
I think ZUNE integration would be a killer...try the ZUNE software here http://www.zune.net/en-us/products/software/download/default.htm
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure, the Zune service and client are nice, but they haven't been compelling enough to gain any real market share in the last few years. Now that Apple has opened up the App Store a bit, several other streaming / subscription services are now available on the iPhone as well.
I'm not saying WP7 won't offer a nice media and gaming experience-- it's just that in order to succeed, MS needs to present a clear and compelling reason people should buy WP7 phones.
The iPhone delivers the smoothest phone UI, huge app library, solid browsing experience, seamless media experience, and simplicity. Android offers choice of form factor and carrier, great integration with Google services (with lots of people use), and almost-WM6-like openness while still offering a smooth user experience).
What does WP7 bring to the table that the iPhone and Android don't?
amb9800 said:
But that's precisely the problem. What does WP7 offer casual phone gamers that the iPhone doesn't? The iPhone has a large existing game library, multiplayer support, more powerful graphics hardware than all WP7 launch phones, and now even some of the score/achievement tracking that Xbox Live offers.
Sure, the Zune service and client are nice, but they haven't been compelling enough to gain any real market share in the last few years. Now that Apple has opened up the App Store a bit, several other streaming / subscription services are now available on the iPhone as well.
I'm not saying WP7 won't offer a nice media and gaming experience-- it's just that in order to succeed, MS needs to present a clear and compelling reason people should buy WP7 phones.
The iPhone delivers the smoothest phone UI, huge app library, solid browsing experience, seamless media experience, and simplicity. Android offers choice of form factor and carrier, great integration with Google services (with lots of people use), and almost-WM6-like openness while still offering a smooth user experience).
What does WP7 bring to the table that the iPhone and Android don't?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, actually, personally I think that Apple and android marketing strategies are far more strong than Microsoft. Furthermore, What I like Apple provided is the frequency of operating system updates. Therefore, we no need to change the handset frequently in order to get the latest updates or functionalities.
However, the frequency of windows phone 7 updates are unknown, nobody knows. However,in here I can say that. Apple, Microsoft and Android using totally different strategies. Since Microsoft didn't manufature their own handsets, they just sell OS to manaufacturers. Therefore, it's unlikely they will provide the update very often. However for Apple,they do manufacture their own handsets, therefore they can focus more on software updates and applications, because all the profit will just go into their pockets.
What Microsoft prepared are the new LIVE TILES UI which I think is the success part, because currently I'm using latest windows live messenger and and zune software. they are awesome.
However, now everyone is enjoying the Apple and Android banquet...let's see what cuisines Microsoft prepared for us...By the way, Dell Lightning with WP7 is a good and sexy device, gonna get one if there is one.
Live tile is basically a Android widget.
Hubs is where WP7 will shine, can't wait to see 3rd party hubs.
juliusaugustus said:
Windows Phone 7 lacks CDMA support: Why? So your going to tell many of the thousands of Verizon Wireless, Sprint, US Cellular Users, MetroPCs cellphone users well I'm glad you were excited about Windows Phone 7 but sorry no handset for you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So does iOS, and that's doing well. Also CDMA will come in time.
juliusaugustus said:
It Cost's Money: Why would a phone manufacturer pay to use a platform that is very immature, when you could easily make a device that has a mature platform like Android or Symbian without paying a licensing to use the OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not all that expensive...it's $10 dollars that you pass onto the user anyway. Instead of your phone costing 200-300 dollars to manufacture it costs +10 dollars more. The final price for a phone is 500-600...10 dollars more is hardly something to think about.
Also you have to pay for desktop windows, or pay a very high preimum for OSX + hardware....they're both doing better than linux in the PC world.
juliusaugustus said:
Hardware Requirements prevent it from reaching low end markets: Well requiring basic thing like Accelerometer with compass, ambient light sensor, proximity sensor, 5mp camera, shutterbutton, and Assisted GPS etc is perfectly acceptable but requiring a 1ghz processor will raise hardware costs and will prevent low end and midrange phone users from buying Windows Phone 7 devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So? that hasn't hurt iOS...and this is something that has to do with time...hardware costs become cheaper over time, so eventually these hardware requirements will become cheap to manufacture and it will enter the low end market.
juliusaugustus said:
Windows Mobile 6.5 has little marketshare and the Microsoft Kin Was a Huge Failure: Why would smarthphone manufacturers want to create a phone with Windows Phone 7 when Windows Mobile 6.5 in its current form has much less then competitors 6-8 percent and the failure of the Microsoft shows has little understanding of the mobile marketplace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Windows Mobile lost market share because they didn't update it as frequently as they should...then they decided to make a paradigm shift and people slowly abandoned windows mobile since there was no future to the OS.
Also, WM still has a decent market share. It's 6-8% in the states and in the teens in Europe according to some recent reports.
juliusaugustus said:
I don't mean to cause hate I was just giving Windows Phone 7 valid criticism. Please leave your thoughts down below.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but no one has a crystal ball.
vetvito said:
Live tile is basically a Android widget.
Hubs is where WP7 will shine, can't wait to see 3rd party hubs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To some degree...I like widgets in theory, but in practice I always disable them if a phone OS allows me to and go to something more unified like Titanium. The reason I dislike widgets is that there are no design guidelines for them generally so it makes your start page look like crap. Live tiles are widgets done right imo.
How about you Americans ditch that way outdated technology? There's absolutely no merit apart from device-based tie-in to a provider.
vetvito said:
Live tile is basically a Android widget.
Hubs is where WP7 will shine, can't wait to see 3rd party hubs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
where can I download live tile widget for android?can you give me the name?wanna give it a try...
yea,the hubs....and cloud-based service.you are able to sync almost everything to skydrive.
I'm still shaking the wait and see approach. MS hasn't done much to impress me. Zune player is a skinned windows media player with one or two neat plugins.
If MS follows suit it'll be another great idea poorly executed. Just look at windows for the pc.
MS's big problem is they charge you for crap that is full of security holes, buggy, not up to par in general. Then they expect you to just deal or con you into thinking that it's the cream of the crop when it's really just a polished turd.
Sent from my FroyoEris using XDA App
Tom Servo said:
How about you Americans ditch that way outdated technology? There's absolutely no merit apart from device-based tie-in to a provider.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, CDMA is superior in almost any aspect. UMTS (3G) has much more in common with CDMA than with GSM.
sylau90 said:
where can I download live tile widget for android?can you give me the name?wanna give it a try...
yea,the hubs....and cloud-based service.you are able to sync almost everything to skydrive.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Huh, pick one?
vetvito said:
Huh, pick one?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry,just now I didn't read your sentence clearly. I thought you said there are some widgets work like live tiles...sorry...haha
jonscapri said:
I'm still shaking the wait and see approach. MS hasn't done much to impress me. Zune player is a skinned windows media player with one or two neat plugins.
If MS follows suit it'll be another great idea poorly executed. Just look at windows for the pc.
MS's big problem is they charge you for crap that is full of security holes, buggy, not up to par in general. Then they expect you to just deal or con you into thinking that it's the cream of the crop when it's really just a polished turd.
Sent from my FroyoEris using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To Me that would would be the defination of Apple and Steve Jobs...
Windows Phone 7 lacks CDMA support: Why? So your going to tell many of the thousands of Verizon Wireless, Sprint, US Cellular Users, MetroPCs cellphone users well I'm glad you were excited about Windows Phone 7 but sorry no handset for you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, CDMA support has been confirmed for early 2011. GSM is what over 90% of the world uses so GSM is coming first.
It Cost's Money: Why would a phone manufacturer pay to use a platform that is very immature, when you could easily make a device that has a mature platform like Android or Symbian without paying a licensing to use the OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This platform would be chosen over both of those because it's an OS that has that "it just works" factor that everyone loves about the iPhone. It's smooth, has great games, zune, office, etc...
Hardware Requirements prevent it from reaching low end markets: Well requiring basic thing like Accelerometer with compass, ambient light sensor, proximity sensor, 5mp camera, shutterbutton, and Assisted GPS etc is perfectly acceptable but requiring a 1ghz processor will raise hardware costs and will prevent low end and midrange phone users from buying Windows Phone 7 devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is a great thing since it means everyone will be able to run the OS and games smoothly. Prices will drop as hardware matures. $199 is pretty standard for those specs and it's a price many are willing to pay.
Windows Mobile 6.5 has little marketshare and the Microsoft Kin Was a Huge Failure: Why would smarthphone manufacturers want to create a phone with Windows Phone 7 when Windows Mobile 6.5 in its current form has much less then competitors 6-8 percent and the failure of the Microsoft shows has little understanding of the mobile marketplace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both have almost nothing to do with Windows Phone. Kin was a huge failure for two reasons IMO, it had to have a data plan, and it lacked apps and games. Manufacturers are already dropping Symbian and Windows Mobile 6.5 isn't supported my MS anymore. Manufacturers are behind WP7 because it's a complete refresh. It's different and looks fun.
jonscapri said:
I'm still shaking the wait and see approach. MS hasn't done much to impress me. Zune player is a skinned windows media player with one or two neat plugins.
If MS follows suit it'll be another great idea poorly executed. Just look at windows for the pc.
MS's big problem is they charge you for crap that is full of security holes, buggy, not up to par in general. Then they expect you to just deal or con you into thinking that it's the cream of the crop when it's really just a polished turd.
Sent from my FroyoEris using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Zune Player is a bit more than a skinned WMP. It has themes, marketplace, subscriptions service, and it has more features like SmartDJ. Windows 7 is a great OS. I haven't had any problems with performance or security at all.
When Windows Phone 7 was announced, every WinMo fan could not wait to see what Microsoft was going to come up with. We were all hoping that Microsoft could give us a modern mobile OS that was feature-rich and stable. Something at best better than Android and at worst comparable.
The first set of news that started to raise eyebrows was the complete design control Microsoft imposed on the phones. From the cpu speed to the number of physical buttons, we jokingly said Microsoft was beginning to sound like Apple. But we brushed it off saying that the high minimum requirements meant all the phones were going to be fabulously powerful and there is nothing wrong with that.
Then more disturbing things started to come out. No bluetooth transfer or mass storage mode. Conflicting reports were coming out about the memory card or lack thereof. There would be no Flash support and Zune software will be needed to manage files on the phone. Suddenly the mobile OS Microsoft was creating started to sound less and less like Android and more like iOS.
But I believe that Microsoft does not see Windows Phone 7 as a competitor to the Android and iPhone phones of this world. I think they are actually after the Blackberry market instead. Then all these limitations make sense. Windows Phone 7 has too many mass consumer limitations to compete with a well established Android OS. But the Blackberry market, as insane as it sounds with how rooted BBs are in government and corporations, is actually attainable.
Microsoft put effort into creating a phone that is a hub of information. Email capabilities when using an Exchange server look amazing. MSN messenger already has a large user base.
+ WP7 handsets are more technologically advanced than BB handsets
+ MSN Messenger is better than BB Messenger
+ Browser experience is without question better than what BB is offering now
- BB is the king of email and WP7 will have to work to trump BB.
But it makes for more sense for this phone to be a BlackBerry beater than an Android one. I would pick any of the 9 debut handsets over a Blackberry. I would have a harder time choosing them over a Desire.
The only hopes of trumping BB phones is rooted in security. For any company to allow the use of wp7 phones, there will needed to be extensive security testing to ensure that the intellectual property is safeguarded. This is especially applicable to governments.
And I believe that is exactly what they did. Here is an interview taken from everythingwm.com:
Two conspicuous absences in the abilities of Windows Phone 7 are Flash and Silverlight — the latter especially, as it is developed by Microsoft themselves. TechRadar talked to Microsoft’s Andy Lees, president of the mobile communications division, on the issue, and this is what he had to say:
“It’s not a religious thing; we support standard H.264 video in the browser. We’re not allergic to Flash, we’re not allergic to Silverlight, we’re not allergic to HTML5 – but this [Windows Phone 7 browser] doesn’t support it. We don’t have the extensibility model inside the browser for those pieces and when you see the future I think you’ll understand why.
[...]
“There is no ActiveX plug-in extensibility because of the security model; we’re not going to do that. And with no ActiveX plug-in model, how would we do Flash?”
It’s about stability, security, and battery life, it seems. Pretty much exactly what Apple said about why they don’t support Flash on the iPhone.
WP7 is not even close to being targeted at the corporate world right now. It's targeted at regular consumers.
No side loading or private publishing
barely any support for policies
no device encryption
BlackBerry will continue to dominate the corporate sector until someone else (and I think it will be Microsoft) decides to compete in those aspects.
RustyGrom said:
WP7 is not even close to being targeted at the corporate world right now. It's targeted at regular consumers.
No side loading or private publishing
barely any support for policies
no device encryption
BlackBerry will continue to dominate the corporate sector until someone else (and I think it will be Microsoft) decides to compete in those aspects.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's almost like he's reading this forum.
http://www.winsupersite.com/mobile/wp7_business.asp explains all this at length in case you're interested.
going to agree with rusty here. Bb market is losing more share than windows to iPhone mostly. Wp7 is a consumer device with some nuances of work related material
Sent from my HTC HD2 using XDA App
RustyGrom said:
It's almost like he's reading this forum.
http://www.winsupersite.com/mobile/wp7_business.asp explains all this at length in case you're interested.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actually started to do some searching after and made a post that did not go thru.
I have read posts that claims Windows will support side-loading apps.
Policy support can be fixed.
No device level encryption, but there is data level encryption so data can be protected and provide developers with flexible options.
My whole thing is this: If Windows is indeed looking to be in the same market space as iOS and Android they will get crushed initially. There are on average comparable phones in the Android market to these 9 WP7 devices.
HTC HD7 vs Desire HD - The Desire HD is better in battery life, camera MP and because it is an Android phone it does not have the quirky limitations that WP7. Why would the average consumer pick the HD7 over the Desire HD? The same goes for the HTC 7 Pro vs Desire Z. The most unique phones out of the bunch are the HTC 7 Surround and the Mozart.
I guess I am looking at it from my point of view. WP7 looks to be more business inspired than Android and iOS and I do not like/want a Blackberry Storm (or Torch).
nicksti said:
I actually started to do some searching after and made a post that did not go thru.
I have read posts that claims Windows will support side-loading apps.
Policy support can be fixed.
No device level encryption, but there is data level encryption so data can be protected and provide developers with flexible options.
My whole thing is this: If Windows is indeed looking to be in the same market space as iOS and Android they will get crushed initially. There are on average comparable phones in the Android market to these 9 WP7 devices.
HTC HD7 vs Desire HD - The Desire HD is better in battery life, camera MP and because it is an Android phone it does not have the quirky limitations that WP7. Why would the average consumer pick the HD7 over the Desire HD? The same goes for the HTC 7 Pro vs Desire Z. The most unique phones out of the bunch are the HTC 7 Surround and the Mozart.
I guess I am looking at it from my point of view. WP7 looks to be more business inspired than Android and iOS and I do not like/want a Blackberry Storm (or Torch).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, at first WP7 will probably get crushed but it will gain momentum.
There's plenty of reasons why consumers will pick up WP7 devices. Better media, better UI, easier to use, a guaranteed experience, higher quality apps, etc. There's been many, many threads and posts on this forum debating this topic so I'd suggest you start reading if you want to know the pros/cons.
Yes, there is side loading but it's only for registered developers. Read the article I posted, it does a good job of explaining it. WP7 is in no way targeted at corporations right now. That will come in time but right now it is squarely pointed at media and social networking hungry consumers.
So yes, because it does include exchange policy support as well as office integration, you could make the argument that it's already more corporate friendly than iPhone and Android. But that's not saying much at all. It is still not even on the same playing field as BlackBerry in that space.
I am not sure if the xda review shares my opinion, but look at the last paragraphof this article:
http://www.xda-developers.com/windows-mobile/xda-exclusive-windows-phone-7-review/
WP7 is targeted at dumbphone users who want to switch to a smartphone.
Many of them already have iPhones, but there are still lots of potential customers who haven't switched to a smartphone yet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdpQir1sqiQ
Windows Phone 7 taking a funny shot at Crackberry users.
I think microsoft kept it to a minimum. They released what was ready. It is not like android got flash right away or it had all the features that it has now from the get go. I think for once microsoft did the right thing. They released a good OS and didn't put in stuff that was not ready to be release. Are they probably testing a faster browser? Flash support? may be turn by turn navigation app of their own? Mass storage support? I do hope so for their sake, and I am pretty sure they do have plans for those features. Lately microsoft has been on the right track not releasing software that is broken and works hals assed and needs to be held back. They went with what was ready and held back what is not ready.
crow26 said:
WP7 is targeted at dumbphone users who want to switch to a smartphone.
Many of them already have iPhones, but there are still lots of potential customers who haven't switched to a smartphone yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great post You just insulted most of the phone users in the world.
agp64 said:
Great post You just insulted most of the phone users in the world.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He's like a broken record with that crap in many WP7 threads.
nkd said:
I think microsoft kept it to a minimum. They released what was ready. It is not like android got flash right away or it had all the features that it has now from the get go. I think for once microsoft did the right thing. They released a good OS and didn't put in stuff that was not ready to be release. Are they probably testing a faster browser? Flash support? may be turn by turn navigation app of their own? Mass storage support? I do hope so for their sake, and I am pretty sure they do have plans for those features. Lately microsoft has been on the right track not releasing software that is broken and works hals assed and needs to be held back. They went with what was ready and held back what is not ready.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Free turn by turn nav is nothing new to MS. They were first to have free TbT on the WinMo 6.5 in Bing search. TbT nav is now a common thing in today's smartphones. For MS to not plan it in from the get go for WP7 is, in my view of it, short sighted.
The TbT incorporated in Bing on my HD2 worked flawlessly. I see nothing broken about software MS already has perfected. My view is MS is just being hard-nosed and far too conservative about features in WP7. It's as if they are daring the market not to support WP7. They are doing the exact opposite of what they need to do to have a mobile OS that will survive in this market. Instead of piling in the features and making a top-notch OS that makes a person say, "WOW! I have to have that!", they are making a first-rate, top-notch OS but skimping on features. This makes a person think, when considering the nature of technology getting better and more feature laden as time passes, that they have to have a WP7 device and then, when they see it doesn't do what they expected because it doesn't have all those features, they become disillusioned and are left with a bummed out feeling toward MS and their shiny, fancy new OS.
Since this is how MS does business....newer tech being LESS feature laden...the next time I buy a car, I will buy a Lexus and expect a model-T
I'm sitting here with the worst case of buyers remorse I've had since I bought a Palm VII. I bought my Surround off-contract, and the store has a no-returns policy for non-contract sales, so this thing is going on Craigslist for a loss tomorrow.
That said, in a lot of ways, my old Bold 9000, BBOS 4.x, circa 2008 had more functionality than this late 2010 WP7 device. I could use it as a storage device, for one thing, and "side load" applications, and more importantly, data (ebooks, music, movies, etc) without needing any sort of sync program. It also had better audio than this Surround, believe it or not.
Croak said:
I'm sitting here with the worst case of buyers remorse I've had since I bought a Palm VII. I bought my Surround off-contract, and the store has a no-returns policy for non-contract sales, so this thing is going on Craigslist for a loss tomorrow.
That said, in a lot of ways, my old Bold 9000, BBOS 4.x, circa 2008 had more functionality than this late 2010 WP7 device. I could use it as a storage device, for one thing, and "side load" applications, and more importantly, data (ebooks, music, movies, etc) without needing any sort of sync program. It also had better audio than this Surround, believe it or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is what happens when opt to be a guinea pig. But you can place a reasonable bet that these initial offering issues will be fixed by Q1 2011. The question is are you willing to wait?
And no, I do not believe your Bold 9000 has better audio than the Surround. But I have not heard the Surround yet.
Croak said:
I'm sitting here with the worst case of buyers remorse I've had since I bought a Palm VII. I bought my Surround off-contract, and the store has a no-returns policy for non-contract sales, so this thing is going on Craigslist for a loss tomorrow.
That said, in a lot of ways, my old Bold 9000, BBOS 4.x, circa 2008 had more functionality than this late 2010 WP7 device. I could use it as a storage device, for one thing, and "side load" applications, and more importantly, data (ebooks, music, movies, etc) without needing any sort of sync program. It also had better audio than this Surround, believe it or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you actually deaf or using broken headphones/speakers? The zune player has the best audio playback off any phone period.
I have posted about other complains on the phone in other threads so i will keep this to a basic summary.
Zune file management is easily the best if you pref active sync then there is something wrong with you plus its media management makes even apple look pafetic.
If you want a mass storage device buy a memory stick there like £20 and work better than any phone mp3 player or book reader.
copy and paste and flash are on the way though tbf c/p is overrated and flash is a battery drain.
multitasking is just for show and in the real world only acts to drain battery and slow down performance (everything it would be useful for already do ie you can read texts whilst in other apps)
turn by turn is just a gimic don't know about anyone else but when i get in my car I have my tomtom and don't kill my phone just getting somewhere.
All in all MS has got the point of a phone and have what is needed working let us not forget the bonuses,
Zune rules everything, hubs and tiles are the future, Xbox live is the greatest thing to happen to phones ever and it all works smoth and looks like something from minority report whils tnot sacrifysing anything thats actually useful, just a bunch of crap people like to say they have.
Zune is an awesome player and I can second that.
But Android is much more hackable and versatile. It's like Windows Mobile 6.5 with better interface and looks!
I like how lumpa's argument on essential features is,"Well, you only THINK you need that."
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Microsoft seem to be putting their software onto apples phone, http://wmpoweruser.com/how-to-alienate-your-customers-101/
whats next microsoft office on iOS if this continues then there will be on reason to get a wp7 device, after all, the iphone has a better gpu, far more memory (i live in the uk so 16gb is the max 8gb is the norm) so why would i want to buy a wp7 device again if MS starts doing this???
Because they're a software company?
davidebanks said:
Microsoft seem to be putting their software onto apples phone, http://wmpoweruser.com/how-to-alienate-your-customers-101/
whats next microsoft office on iOS if this continues then there will be on reason to get a wp7 device, after all, the iphone has a better gpu, far more memory (i live in the uk so 16gb is the max 8gb is the norm) so why would i want to buy a wp7 device again if MS starts doing this???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
why is office on mac os?
why should they not?
WP7 has a different user experience and i like it much more than the android/ios experience....wp7 wouldn`t a good plattform if only the apps are the pros for it.
And why not give iOS users possibility to like office and maybe consider wp7 for their next phone then?
Well, might never happen, cause most applers stay applers...
Sent from my HTC 7 Mozart using Board Express
Geez. Why should you buy a WP7 rather than iPhone? Because the user experience between the two devices are completely different.
Obviously apps are going to be cross platform, Microsoft is after all a software company. Now, one could argue that they should perhaps do what Google does - and wait with releasing their apps on other platforms until they absolutely have to, but this is the iPhone we are talking about - they have to.
Good Point bro!!!
And because in the futur all softwares will be able to run all platform.
0711 said:
why is office on mac os?
why should they not?
WP7 has a different user experience and i like it much more than the android/ios experience....wp7 wouldn`t a good plattform if only the apps are the pros for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why is there iTunes Windows? It is slow by the way.
I am sure that companies do this so that user can have options and maybe pick the companies OS next time.
Peew971 said:
Because they're a software company?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then why do they not port Halo to PS3 for example? Like you said, they are a software company, and could easily double the revenue. MS are idiots for not porting Xbox games like Halo to other platforms.
Keep in mind that the software developed for the iPhone was a separate team from those working on Wp7.
Also, if iphone users start to use a bunch of microsoft apps, maybe they will think "maybe I should be using a microsoft phone" and then buy a windows phone. Sure it could go the other way as well... but I'm an optimist.
To make money, as what pretty much most if not all paid apps are for.
digger1985 said:
Then why do they not port Halo to PS3 for example? Like you said, they are a software company, and could easily double the revenue. MS are idiots for not porting Xbox games like Halo to other platforms.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Too much work? Maybe they figured that game exclusivity is what drives the console sales.
canadariot2312 said:
Too much work? Maybe they figured that game exclusivity is what drives the console sales.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
is all about the market share, and profit.
canadariot2312 said:
Too much work? Maybe they figured that game exclusivity is what drives the console sales.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But porting apps over to iOS is not? How come they can't figure out that app exclusivity also drives phone sales.
digger1985 said:
But porting apps over to iOS is not? How come they can't figure out that app exclusivity also drives phone sales.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because console games are complicated and require certain components to work. Every smartphone uses the same SoC set no matter what OS they run whether it would be snapdragon, omap, a4, etc. The consoles are made differently, the 360 with tri-cores and the ps3 uses something really confusing. Than again, Final Fantasy did appear on the Xbox, but Sony didn't exclusive rights to that game.
I would imagine that it is miles easier for porting apps, or maybe they want to do something like having an app on a certain phone will just run better as oppose to something not native.
kabumm said:
And why not give iOS users possibility to like office and maybe consider wp7 for their next phone then?
Well, might never happen, cause most applers stay applers...
Sent from my HTC 7 Mozart using Board Express
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't . Don't get me wrong, I loved my iPhone (until Apple butchered it with iOS 4), but when I went to go snag an iPhone 4 and got to play with it side by side with the Samsung Focus, the choice was clear--Focus is a MUCH nicer device, with a nicer screen and of course, Windows Phone 7 itself--which makes iOS look antiquated and stale.
That said, I also have a 2010 Macbook Pro 13" which I got purely so I can submit apps to the iOS store, but I can't stand Mac OSX, it's a ****in' turd. So I'm glad the laptop runs Windows 7 nicely enough, LOL.
digger1985 said:
Then why do they not port Halo to PS3 for example? Like you said, they are a software company, and could easily double the revenue. MS are idiots for not porting Xbox games like Halo to other platforms.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
MS also makes the hardware for the XBOX. And they sold the hardware at a loss. Their revenue model was dependent on software attach rates being high on the console. People often choose game consoles based on exclusive games. MS could spend millions marketing Halo because they know that the reason people buy XBOX consoles is so that they could play awesome games. Period. Everything else the XBOX does is just gravy.
People buy smartphones for so many different reasons.
MS can't invest millions of dollars into the promotion and marketing of a single app, because a large portion of customers won't care about it.
Bing and One Note are fighting for mindshare. You can't have a killer phone app if nobody even knows what it is.
The only way to market and advertise how good Bing and One Note could be is by putting it the hands of the most people possible. And for now, that's on the iPhone.
Reflexx1 said:
People buy smartphones for so many different reasons.
MS can't invest millions of dollars into the promotion and marketing of a single app, because a large portion of customers won't care about it.
Bing and One Note are fighting for mindshare. You can't have a killer phone app if nobody even knows what it is.
The only way to market and advertise how good Bing and One Note could be is by putting it the hands of the most people possible. And for now, that's on the iPhone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you are using a smartphone for a single app, than you need to rethink.
I heard that you can get Bing on Android devices as well, although not many people actually want it (seeing that it is a Google phone). I think putting Microsoft software on other OS' is not a bad idea. After all, you see Microsoft everywhere.
Reflexx1 said:
MS also makes the hardware for the XBOX. And they sold the hardware at a loss. Their revenue model was dependent on software attach rates being high on the console. People often choose game consoles based on exclusive games. MS could spend millions marketing Halo because they know that the reason people buy XBOX consoles is so that they could play awesome games. Period. Everything else the XBOX does is just gravy.
People buy smartphones for so many different reasons.
MS can't invest millions of dollars into the promotion and marketing of a single app, because a large portion of customers won't care about it.
Bing and One Note are fighting for mindshare. You can't have a killer phone app if nobody even knows what it is.
The only way to market and advertise how good Bing and One Note could be is by putting it the hands of the most people possible. And for now, that's on the iPhone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You comment doesn't make any sense. They sell hardware at a loss and make money from games. Keeping Xbox exclusives would make sense if they made money from the hardware. Since they make money from the games, they should be doing everything to port games to other platforms as well.
Thing is, Microsoft is the top player in the console industry - so they don't have to port games to other platforms. The increase in revenue would likely be offset by the increase in development cost to support the PS3 and/or Wii. Not to mention the fact that Microsoft Game Studio titles do drive console sales (I know plenty of people who have bought an Xbox 360 purely because of Halo for example); higher console sales lead to higher revenue (even if they did initially sell hardware at a loss) as people pay for the XBL Gold service, spend money in the Xbox marketplace and purchase Xbox 360 games (for which MS get's a license fee no matter if it's an in-house title or not).
This is pretty much how the printer/ink/toner industry or coffee-pod industry works also. They sell the hardware at little to no profit but you are tied in to buying their ink/toner or coffee-pods for the lifetime of the product. It's actually cheaper for me to purchase a new CLP every so often than it is to buy new toner - when I then sell the old printer online I more or less come out at zero cost.
In the smartphone sector, Apple is the king of the hill and it only makes sense to have their software available. Apps do not drive phone sales; UX (User eXperience) does. Keeping a title exclusive to WP7 makes no sense at all. At the same time, it does not make sense (business wise) to support all possible smartphone platforms out there, only iOS and Android has a valuable marketplace (app wise) so those are the platforms to support - this is why Google hasn't released their apps as official WP7 clients thus far; Windows Phone 7 doesn't have a big enough marketshare that it pays for them to spend development dollars on it. Once the OS gains momentum (if it does) Google will rather quickly release what they have to offer.
All said, I do agree it's painful when "better" software appears for the iPhone rather than their own OS, WP7, but this goes back to the fact Microsoft are so large. There is no single person making decisions, they have COO's and project managers en masse, often trying to out-do eachother or vote other projects down as they step on their own projects toes. Microsoft is filled to the brim with highly competent people, but they operate like a bureaucracy. Ask anyone who's ever worked there and they'll all more or less tell the same story - the layers of hierarchy is killing creative output.
How many times has Microsoft not come out with killer products which has failed miserably in the marketplace because upper management hasn't seen or understood the possibility. Take Media Center for example, it has given the best UX for DVRs for years - still, they never took it to the next level and now it's almost too late. With a lot of luck their embedded Media Center's showcased (in a back-room no less?!) at CES may make a dent in the market, but it's highly unlikely as they missed the boat. GoogleTV, AppleTV, Boxee and a whole lot of other players are now ruling the roost.
That's exactly what they did with the mobile sector also - they had great ideas and were the top players years ago. But they became complacent and stopped innovating. Then other players came along and completely killed them; what was WM's marketshare last year? How much of that was made up of HD2 sales which were re-flashed with Android?
digger1985 said:
Then why do they not port Halo to PS3 for example? Like you said, they are a software company, and could easily double the revenue. MS are idiots for not porting Xbox games like Halo to other platforms.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is off topic but why would you want to port Halo to the PS3? Halo is more aimed at muliplayer and as everyone knows Playstation sucks at on-line gaming.
http://www.techtree.com/India/Reviews/Windows_Phone_7_Review_Part_2/551-114241-598-6.html
Unfortunately they were not able to fully test some features because they were getting blocked by country limitations. They were tolerant of this, although I find it shocking that companies can violate freedom of internet and free trade in this way. They still managed to do a very good review of the OS in its current state and assessment of what additions are needed.
CSMR said:
http://www.techtree.com/India/Reviews/Windows_Phone_7_Review_Part_2/551-114241-598-6.html
Unfortunately they were not able to fully test some features because they were getting blocked by country limitations. They were tolerant of this, although I find it shocking that companies can violate freedom of internet and free trade in this way. They still managed to do a very good review of the OS in its current state and assessment of what additions are needed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Features such as Zune are blocked by the ridiculous music / movie licensing groups that are unique to each country. It is a huge amount of work to get the license to sell stuff like that in other countries.
Xbox Live is being launched in different countries all over the world (was just recently launched in Russia, Poland, South Africa, Greece, Czech Republic, Hungary, Brazil, Colombia, and Chile) but requires a lot of infrastructure such as servers, billing infrastructure, etc. Also requires more people to be hired to manage the thing in those countries with their specific rules and regulations.
I find it weird though that in more than half of the countries that WP7 has officially been launched you are unable to purchase applications? I can't see what kind of usage rights can cause this so I'm assuming it's only a billing problem.
Good review, thanks for the link.
I wonder whether there are some differences in OS versions from device to device because on my Mozart I don't see any signs of many gripes people seem to have.
Gapless playback works, the Marketplace app works very fast, doesn't hang, crash, show black screens or whatever, applications install almost instantaneously, launch time is more or less on par with the iPhone (a bit slower, but I wouldn't notice if I hadn't read about it earlier). In fact, I still haven't encountered a single OS bug. I've seen quirks for sure and things like no way to upload an edited document are plain ridiculous, but then again this is counterweighed by the fact that other OSes fail even more miserably in some areas (e.g. Android phones completely fail to download attachments from my work Exchange, and nobody knows how to solve that, iPhone fails occasionally, but when it does, there's no way to tell it to re-download it, etc. etc.). The built-in Office is by far superior to all packages available on iOS/Android in terms of compatibility with ppt files I need to check on the go, etc.
Also, I became a huge fan of Zune Pass, and it's hard to imagine how I managed to live without it. To add to the topic, WP7 has absolutely stellar audio codecs. When I tried WP7 on HD2, I was literally stunned, I didn't think software could influence sound quality to such an extent. This is no cheap opensource stuff you get on Android, this is real iPhone level expensive quality.
So all in all I'm more positive about the OS than I was a while ago. I wouldn't recommend it to my friends or relatives here, but that's because of difficulties of setting up US accounts, need to jailbreak to install a Russian keyboard or a satnav app etc.
vangrieg said:
I wonder whether there are some differences in OS versions from device to device because on my Mozart I don't see any signs of many gripes people seem to have.
Gapless playback works
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Some fair points, but let me comment on the audio stuff. From what I've heard gapless playback is dependent on file format. So to say WP7 does not support gapless is correct as it's not guaranteed to work.
other OSes fail even more miserably in some areas (e.g. Android phones completely fail to download attachments from my work Exchange
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, how android can claim to support exchange is beyond me.
To add to the topic, WP7 has absolutely stellar audio codecs. When I tried WP7 on HD2, I was literally stunned, I didn't think software could influence sound quality to such an extent. This is no cheap opensource stuff you get on Android, this is real iPhone level expensive quality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correctly working software does not influence sound quality, except through dsp software. It's true that (closed source) Android audio software is poor. Look at good opensource software, e.g rockbox or foobar2000, and you will see how infinitely superior to toy attempts like WP7. Only when you give 3rd party apps file system access (to access and organize music files directly) and multitasking will you have good audio support in WP7.
Before WP7 I also thought that software couldn't influence audio quality a lot. Now I see it does. And yes, I tried Rockbox e.a. I don't know how WP7 does it, maybe via properly written DSP drivers, maybe by paying chip manufacturers for some proprietary stuff, but the difference is huge.
vangrieg said:
Before WP7 I also thought that software couldn't influence audio quality a lot. Now I see it does. And yes, I tried Rockbox e.a. I don't know how WP7 does it, maybe via properly written DSP drivers, maybe by paying chip manufacturers for some proprietary stuff, but the difference is huge.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If it's a software or hardware dsp issue, then there is a problem, since dsp should not be applied by default. Another possibility is HTC, producing a device named after a great composer, put in a decent headphone amp. These can be very bad and alter the frequency response or have an audible noise floor. A rightmark test will show this, but good on HTC if it did this.
As posted at L337Ware
I'm not some kind of communist hippie but I have to admit it's nice to get a high quality free application that isn't marred by Ads every once in a while. I've noticed a trend of sorts lately that alot of applications I originally downloaded aren't offered for free anymore or now have Ads plastered about them. In a matter of fact I probably need to consider how I'm going to update some of the reviews already on this site.
This leads me to wonder why? Is this a sign of things to come? We are already being charged a premium for XBox Live games in comparison to the titles on other platforms even in the light of some missing features. I've kind of attributed that to supply and demand though and know the prices will drop as things become more competitive. Perhaps the initial offerings were a simple test of the waters? I've considered this as developers are still trying to get their footing on this new platform. Regardless it still kind of feels like a bit of a bait and switch to the end user.
That being said I understand the need to cash in because I know some of these applications took a considerable amount of time and effort on the developers part. Honestly I wish as much consideration was placed on developing new business models as producting new products in the mobile market. Creative uses of Geotagging, cameras, and perhaps even social networking could be used as opposed to damaging the user's experience.
Since I kind of dropped the gauntlet there I will cough up a few examples.
Geotagging - The user has to go to say a store in order to unlock an application. This would also work with a setup where a purchase has to be made if a code was offered on the receipt.
Cameras - Scan a bar code for this product using your phone to unlock application. This could even change from month to month as the app relocks.
Social Networking - Like this page on Facebook and keep it liked to keep app full featured or follow this entity on twitter to unlock app.
I'm not saying all of these ideas would be easy or even effective but the current models could definitely use some work. At the end of the day I don't really blame the developers as they are doing what they need to in order to justify their hard work. I believe the burden really falls on the creator of the platform to step up and separate themselves from the pack. In this case I hope Microsoft moves a bit faster than their competition.
L337Ware said:
I hope Microsoft moves a bit faster than their competition.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I lol'd.....
Seriously though, I noticed on the app store the other day that there's a Lego game where you can unlock in game items by going to a shop and scanning the bar codes on actual Lego products so what your suggesting is probably already happening on a small scale, if not its right around the corner.
MS will probably catch up in 3-4 years ....... just kidding.
Sent From My Fingers To Your Face.....
Given the three alternatives you proposed, I'd take ads in the app over all of them. All of those would be far more annoying requirements than a minimal ad that I most likely won't respond to anyway. In those cases, I have to go out of my way to locate a product and allow someone else to be aware of my activity.
All things considered, I think I'd rather keep things as they are. Many of the ad-based apps I have now only display the ads on title, setup, and other ancillary screens, not during the main functions of the app. That seems like a reasonable approach.
I can see where you are coming from. Thing is I tend to get very annoyed when I accidentally click an ad while trying to use an application. Seriously I'm not really a professional in the field of digital marketing but if I can come up with alternatives that easily there definately has to be a better way.
L337Ware said:
I can see where you are coming from. Thing is I tend to get very annoyed when I accidentally click an ad while trying to use an application. Seriously I'm not really a professional in the field of digital marketing but if I can come up with alternatives that easily there definately has to be a better way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've never accidentally clicked an ad in an app. Either you need to start using higher quality apps or finetune your motor skills
Sure, your alternatives are interesting, but how exactly would developers get paid using them? Take the FB/Twitter like/follow scenario for example - sure, you gain a bunch of followers but there's no money changing hands.
Scanning a barcode could work for branded apps, i.e. the app is commissioned by the manufacturers of the product in question. But apps like these are generally free anyway - unless we are talking e.g. Lego Games where this approach would be great (although, including a code INSIDE a box of Legos would be better in terms of revenue).
I really like the GeoTagging idea though, but again I'm not entirely sure how you, as a developer, would leverage this. You could do what Cocktail Flow has done and sell your app for $$$ but include an in-app code-redemption (or in this case, Location-based) system of sorts where the full app unlocks. It sort of limits your reach though as you will either have to contact retailers (or theme parks, coffee shops, etc etc) all across the globe to strike deals with them about kickbacks.
Generally speaking, using GeoLocation or Barcodes is pretty smart, but not for the average developer. Too much overhead in terms of administrating the scheme. For branded apps I definitely think we'll see more taking advantage of this to unlock "special" features or offers though.
As an interesting side-note, there are fairly huge discrepancies between countries in terms or trial-to-paid conversions and the like. The US seems to be very low on the list in buying apps at all whereas Australia is on top when comparing the same app, with an equal price. As a "desktop" ISV I've never come across this before (the US has always given very high trial-to-paid conversions for me) so there is something about the mobile sector that makes people vary about purchasing apps. Even comparing a $20 desktop app with a $1 mobile app the desktop app has higher sales. My take is that the app "bubble" is about to burst.
how dare the devs make money???
Research has shown that ad supported apps do better than paid apps. I would gladly pay for any app over an ad supported, but apparently I'm in the minority on that one.
Just ask the indie developer Elbert Perez, over 100k made on ad revenue...
ad free - the wonderful application that blocks ad related sites systen-wide. love it !
emigrating said:
I've never accidentally clicked an ad in an app. Either you need to start using higher quality apps or finetune your motor skills
Sure, your alternatives are interesting, but how exactly would developers get paid using them? Take the FB/Twitter like/follow scenario for example - sure, you gain a bunch of followers but there's no money changing hands.
Scanning a barcode could work for branded apps, i.e. the app is commissioned by the manufacturers of the product in question. But apps like these are generally free anyway - unless we are talking e.g. Lego Games where this approach would be great (although, including a code INSIDE a box of Legos would be better in terms of revenue).
I really like the GeoTagging idea though, but again I'm not entirely sure how you, as a developer, would leverage this. You could do what Cocktail Flow has done and sell your app for $$$ but include an in-app code-redemption (or in this case, Location-based) system of sorts where the full app unlocks. It sort of limits your reach though as you will either have to contact retailers (or theme parks, coffee shops, etc etc) all across the globe to strike deals with them about kickbacks.
Generally speaking, using GeoLocation or Barcodes is pretty smart, but not for the average developer. Too much overhead in terms of administrating the scheme. For branded apps I definitely think we'll see more taking advantage of this to unlock "special" features or offers though.
As an interesting side-note, there are fairly huge discrepancies between countries in terms or trial-to-paid conversions and the like. The US seems to be very low on the list in buying apps at all whereas Australia is on top when comparing the same app, with an equal price. As a "desktop" ISV I've never come across this before (the US has always given very high trial-to-paid conversions for me) so there is something about the mobile sector that makes people vary about purchasing apps. Even comparing a $20 desktop app with a $1 mobile app the desktop app has higher sales. My take is that the app "bubble" is about to burst.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Way to be disingenuous...
Desktop apps are easier and better to use, and are usually worth the extra cash. Higher rez graphics, better graphics in general (even with Integrated cards) and generally of higher quality with better support IME.
But it's not hard to misclick an ad when apps seem to have them on the bottom on one screen and at the top of others, and some apps randomly change ad positioning.
It's part of the reason why I uninstalled AlphaJack. There aren't enough people on the platform to not have a ton of "dead" games in your list, and the Ads move from top to bottom on different screens. Also, Ads on the top of the screen in Metro are just terrible, and prone to misclicks because the gesture area is up there (to see your Wi-Fi status and Reception level)... Ads on the bottom are prone to misclicks because the menu and app control buttons are down there. Ads generally look pretty bad and do not fit within the GUI, either...
All those ideas are pretty terrible and with gas prices these days it costs more to go to the store to unlock an app than to just buy it. For me and where I'm located, I could probably buy 10 apps with the gas I wasted just to unlock one app...
How about they just give longer trial periods so that we don't have to buy basically every app on impulse. Very short time limited trials (i.e. Android's 15 minutes), and feature limited trials (many WP7 apps) do not give me incentive to buy anything.
Most functionality we need on a smartphone is trivial to obtain via stock apps, anyways, besides games.
Your options 1 and 2.. Have the user buy something else, or get close to a for-purchase product, to make the app free. Your option 3.. follow them on a social network, never give them any money.
Why not just skip a burger/beer/brownie and give the dev a couple of dollars for the app? I don't understand people.. they'll pay $10-$15 to sit in a movie theater for 2 hours but won't spend $2.99 to use an app everday forevermore. YOu said you respect their time and effort, do you really? Don't forget that they have to pay to be in the Marketplace.
Look, I'm a regular user too... I'm hesitant to spend on something when I don't know if it's good or if free alternatives will do it. That's why MS put trials in. Unfortunately MS wasn't smart enough to have a 3rd category between "paid" and "free" called "trial", so people just browse free apps and devs have to do ads to make money.
This still isn't a big deal. The app's free. The devs support their users for free. Maybe we should be telling Google etc to find a revolutionary new complicated business model and stop sticking ads in our web pages
MSdoes have trial apps.
Sent from my SGH-i917 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
Add suported model is also the easiest to gain money, no paperwork with ms. A few clicks and your good to go, plus you can serve a much larger crowd since a lot of people can only use free apps on wp7.
Even a big part of europe does not have the possibility to buy apps yet and you dont want to exclude your own countries people ( in my case), your friends and family.