Related
face it, low level apis and languages are for hobbyists now adays. programming languages like C# are huge. .Net makes it so easy and quick to write applications. that's what professionals use. the amount of applications released will be explosive. go ahead, go to android, it's crappy java, and if you use the native development kit,it compiles against the old instruction set. android has hardly even made a dent in the market. it will never be mainstream,just like linux. whine all you want, but microsoft got a bad rap because of crappy coders who crashed the os all the time. it is no longer a hobbyist OS but a consumer OS.
no matter how easy C# is and everything but sometimes you still need access to low level functionality. I agree it's a good idea to recommend modern languages for development on WP7 or any future OS but I don't think it's alright to completely deny the privileged mode APIs, like they were previously called on WM. It's alright if you need to get special certificates if you want to do such risky things (you need that already on WM6) but it still should be possible after all.
I agree about the Android part of your post. On this board it seems to get hyped quited a lot but in real life sales are not really that groundbreaking like everyone thinks. WM is still a lot stronger. Still, I don't even see any advantages you'd get with a switch to Android!
I'm a .net dev but there's instances where you need the unmanaged APIs to do things. There's lots of gaps in the .net compact framework.
I got a nexus one for me and my wife. I was a WM fanboy but I have to say I will never use a WM device again. I have a zune hd and it sucks at everything. The new browser is worse then WM 6.5. I think WM7 is gonna fail big time. What are you talking about that android is not getting market share? Android will gain 20% more market share in two years.
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100209-717900.html
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/android_market_share_doubles_will_overtake_palm_soon.php
http://phandroid.com/2009/11/15/android-stealing-symbian-winmo-market-share/
shep211 said:
I got a nexus one for me and my wife. I was a WM fanboy but I have to say I will never use a WM device again. I have a zune hd and it sucks at everything. The new browser is worse then WM 6.5. I think WM7 is gonna fail big time. What are you talking about that android is not getting market share? Android will gain 20% more market share in two years.
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100209-717900.html
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/android_market_share_doubles_will_overtake_palm_soon.php
http://phandroid.com/2009/11/15/android-stealing-symbian-winmo-market-share/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Noone knows what's going to happen in two years. That prediction was also made before WP7 was announced so it's somewhat meaningless now. Who said the browser is the same one that's in the ZuneHD? The web browser was an afterthought for the ZuneHD and it's a prime feature of WP7. I expect it to be much improved.
RustyGrom said:
Noone knows what's going to happen in two years. That prediction was also made before WP7 was announced so it's somewhat meaningless now. Who said the browser is the same one that's in the ZuneHD? The web browser was an afterthought for the ZuneHD and it's a prime feature of WP7. I expect it to be much improved.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have seen all the wm7 videos and its the same os. They said WM7 would not be based off of the zune hd os but it is. Watch the zune hd videos then WM7 videos. Same os and same browser. They are just adding phone support. I preordered my zune hd and was every unhappy with it. Nothing new or better then ipod. The browser has to be the worst browsing experience ever. Cant download podcast from the phone. You have to dock it and load the podcast on the phone. Cant listen to music without headphones. Tons and tons of stuff that makes you think WTF.
Interesting considering the browser IS different, and you other complaints wont be there on a phone.
Its not the same OS, its just they standardizing there UIs.
RAMMANN said:
no matter how easy C# is and everything but sometimes you still need access to low level functionality. I agree it's a good idea to recommend modern languages for development on WP7 or any future OS but I don't think it's alright to completely deny the privileged mode APIs, like they were previously called on WM. It's alright if you need to get special certificates if you want to do such risky things (you need that already on WM6) but it still should be possible after all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
RustyGrom said:
I'm a .net dev but there's instances where you need the unmanaged APIs to do things. There's lots of gaps in the .net compact framework.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes i know we need certain APIs to do certain things,but nobody knows yet what the new framework will be like. who's to say what is limited and what isn't when we don't have any of this info yet.
I completely agree with o2neouzr. Whay are people whining about it when they have no idea what will and won't be included in .NET CF 4?
I've only done a small amount of phone development on WM6 and C# has been fine. My app responds to missed calls and texts when I'm on the motorbike. I recently discussed porting it to the iPhone with a friend. It turns out even really basic stuff like sending a text, knowing if you've missed a call, running with the screen off are all impossible on the iPhone - even with approval from Apple. I reckon we'll be allowed to do a reasonable amount. It'll still be better than the crappy iPhone.
Think of an Operating System like the rule of law in a country; now there is a rumor that the supreme leaders decide to enforce that the only dress code allowed is T-Shirt, of course, the rationals in breadth and depth as in any totalitarian country is only known to the supreme leaders.
"Death to fashion designers!" yelled the fanatics.
"They can't see the simplicity of T-Shirt!" chimed the supporters.
" It is easy to make!!" cried the guards.
" It takes only a minute to paint!!!" said the propagandist.
" It is ready for mass market!!!!" snapped the enforcers to anyone who dare to challenge the new establishment.
"Burn in hell for daring to wear any other dress! T-Shirt is the future! Any one wearing dress is living in the stone age !"
Of course it is hard for concern citizens like we, fashion designers - native developers, to have a decent conversation with this group of people. How can words explain the beauty of our love ones (customers), walking through the crowds of T-Shirts --- in designers' dress. How can we explain the search of excellence, as the way of life, to so many of us, perfecting the art, year after year, to bring out the best of us for the world to see the beauty of free expression.
It is not like that we can't make T-Shirt, it is no-brainer for most of us. The beauty of simplicity is simple but not simpler. A native developers try to achieve simplicity without making things simpler.
Fred23 said:
I completely agree with o2neouzr. Whay are people whining about it when they have no idea what will and won't be included in .NET CF 4?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not really about having the limited stuff of .NET CF in mind and doing PInvoke for really standard issues. It's about the whole architecture of the runtime. can you do DLL injection or hook into another process with .NET? Not at all. DLLs don't even exist there. You understand... we need the native API if we want to do all the funny things. Recent example: On the Omnia2 there's the taskmon service running which is closing applications if you open more than 3 or 4 (!!!!). chainfire guy wrote a tool that injects into the service to stop this nonsense. More examples are the File explorer extensions, Quick menu, XTask etc. You don't need this stuff? Fine! Go get an iphone!
RAMMANN said:
It's not really about having the limited stuff of .NET CF in mind and doing PInvoke for really standard issues. It's about the whole architecture of the runtime. can you do DLL injection or hook into another process with .NET? Not at all. DLLs don't even exist there. You understand... we need the native API if we want to do all the funny things. Recent example: On the Omnia2 there's the taskmon service running which is closing applications if you open more than 3 or 4 (!!!!). chainfire guy wrote a tool that injects into the service to stop this nonsense. More examples are the File explorer extensions, Quick menu, XTask etc. You don't need this stuff? Fine! Go get an iphone!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ummmmmmmmmm DLLs do exist in .net. In fact, pretty much the entire .net framework is just a collection of DLLs. Have you ever even written a .net app or any software at all for that matter? It seems your hatred is extremely unfounded.
There likely won't be a file explorer to extend and all of the other things you list get into modifying the UI so those won't be allowed either. They're ugly hacks that shouldn't be needed on any platform. Yea, WinMo needed them to cover up it's many flaws.
You don't need native APIs to do those things necessarily. There just needs to be managed APIs to do them. They won't be allowing it though so it's a moot point.
If you want to completely replace the UI, go get an Anroid phone!
There's a middle ground that they need to find. I feel that's what they're shooting for but it doesn't sound like they're gonna hit it. I'm expecting only a subset of .net CF as even that would allow you to do 'too much' in their mind.
alright I admit I have written bull****. of course there are DLLs in .NET but I rather mean they are handled little different than usual DLLs. So I thought common sense is you call them assemblies instead of DLLs. oh! And yes I have written Windows applications in .NET but always refrained from using it on WM due to performance issues and because it's so incomplete and for all the interesting stuff you have to use PInvoke anyway. Also if you at least had checked the link in my signature before judging then you would have seen that I'm actually writing software for WM. besides that, it's even my daily job to write software for Windows/WM for like... ahm... 12 years now.
RustyGrom said:
There likely won't be a file explorer to extend and all of the other things you list get into modifying the UI so those won't be allowed either. They're ugly hacks that shouldn't be needed on any platform. Yea, WinMo needed them to cover up it's many flaws.
You don't need native APIs to do those things necessarily. There just needs to be managed APIs to do them. They won't be allowing it though so it's a moot point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's the point actually. What I love about WM is that you can easily (or not so easy) hack your way through it and if that's not allowed anymore in a new revision then a lot of fun is taken for me and I guess for "a few more folks" here on XDA. WM like it is with 6.5.x is REALLY comfortable with me and that's no joke! I'm trying to customize and modify it because it's a lot of fun to do so, not because the OS is so bad. Currently I'm running 6.5.x with Sense 2.5 on my Topaz and everything is running really smooth and responsive and I can't complain at all!!
RustyGrom said:
If you want to completely replace the UI, go get an Anroid phone!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hate Android! I don't really want to code in Java. And their native API is a joke isn't it? If WP7 isn't suitable anymore (and right now we don't really know for sure) then I have to keep going with the old **** aka WM 6.5.x until I'm old and grey. why should I change OS if there's nothing that matches the customization possibilites of our present OS?
I could understand the frustration for not having full access to native API, full multitasking, etc.
It will be no joy ... no fun ... especially when you simply cannot customize the UI "the way you want" (You can still customize the WP7 start screen).
You cannot express your full creativity.
That is really valid concern.
But ....................................
Could this "new situation of WP7" trigger another kind of creativity?
To the extreme, who would think creating fart application? I know, probably this is a bad example of creativity, but still ... it is kind of creativity.
My point, in whatever situation, people will simply adapt and certain people will excel with their creativity!
Could that be YOU?
RAMMANN said:
I hate Android! I don't really want to code in Java. And their native API is a joke isn't it? If WP7 isn't suitable anymore (and right now we don't really know for sure) then I have to keep going with the old **** aka WM 6.5.x until I'm old and grey. why should I change OS if there's nothing that matches the customization possibilites of our present OS?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
RAMMANN said:
If WP7 isn't suitable anymore (and right now we don't really know for sure) then I have to keep going with the old **** aka WM 6.5.x until I'm old and grey. why should I change OS if there's nothing that matches the customization possibilites of our present OS?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If I understand this Charlie Kindel (who supposedly is the guy in charge of all this API/SDK stuff), it's not their intention to lock the "fun stuff" out indefinitely. What he's saying is more in the lines of "we want a consistent and logical environment/ecosystem for developers and users, and in order to achieve that, we need to change from the "let's push everything we have out the door" mentality towards "let's make it really good", and this requires serious focused step-by-step approach". They want to start with "consumer application" and hobbyist developers (the latter probably means fart app makers and such), which is understandable because they want to build consumer appeal first. Other categories of developers will be addressed after that.
So, while I don't expect much "fun" you're talking about in WP7, I think this will evolve over time. It's unfortunate that we're not getting things to play with right now, but maybe you won't need to wait until you are old and grey haired. And also maybe we'll really get great APIs/SDK, which will be more useful, consistent and complete than the current incompletely and sometimes incredibly poorly documented mess. Just trying to be positive here.
RAMMANN said:
That's the point actually. What I love about WM is that you can easily (or not so easy) hack your way through it and if that's not allowed anymore in a new revision then a lot of fun is taken for me and I guess for "a few more folks" here on XDA. WM like it is with 6.5.x is REALLY comfortable with me and that's no joke! I'm trying to customize and modify it because it's a lot of fun to do so, not because the OS is so bad. Currently I'm running 6.5.x with Sense 2.5 on my Topaz and everything is running really smooth and responsive and I can't complain at all!!
I hate Android! I don't really want to code in Java. And their native API is a joke isn't it? If WP7 isn't suitable anymore (and right now we don't really know for sure) then I have to keep going with the old **** aka WM 6.5.x until I'm old and grey. why should I change OS if there's nothing that matches the customization possibilites of our present OS?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you. Many people hate WM6.5, I like it. I enjoy the customizability as many others on here do. However, I would also enjoy 'retiring' from the need to do that. It's kind of annoying knowing that the first thing I have to do when I get a new phone is go home and HardSPL it and flash a new ROM. I've heard some of the newer devices are much better out the door (HD2 for example) but haven't seen this for myself.
I don't think the members of this forum are part of Microsoft's target audience for end users. Devs, yea, but not end users. They are shooting for people disenchanted with their iPhone, Android, and more importantly the other 75% of the cell phone market that's still using "feature phones" (aka dumb phones).
It definitely looks like MS is going to lock down much more than WM6.5. Will we still be cooking custom roms? My guess is yes. But your common user will have more restrictions on what apps can and can't do.
I look at this as a new challenge more than anything else.
vangrieg said:
If I understand this Charlie Kindel (who supposedly is the guy in charge of all this API/SDK stuff), it's not their intention to lock the "fun stuff" out indefinitely. What he's saying is more in the lines of "we want a consistent and logical environment/ecosystem for developers and users, and in order to achieve that, we need to change from the "let's push everything we have out the door" mentality towards "let's make it really good", and this requires serious focused step-by-step approach". They want to start with "consumer application" and hobbyist developers (the latter probably means fart app makers and such), which is understandable because they want to build consumer appeal first. Other categories of developers will be addressed after that.
So, while I don't expect much "fun" you're talking about in WP7, I think this will evolve over time. It's unfortunate that we're not getting things to play with right now, but maybe you won't need to wait until you are old and grey haired. And also maybe we'll really get great APIs/SDK, which will be more useful, consistent and complete than the current incompletely and sometimes incredibly poorly documented mess. Just trying to be positive here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a good way to look at it. I just hope that they don't get too restrictive from the start. I think the .net CF would be a good starting point that they should add onto but it almost sounds like they're only picking and choosing pieces from it. If we've got the whole .net CF (maybe minus a few things they don't want us doing) I would be fine with that.
RustyGrom said:
I agree with you. Many people hate WM6.5, I like it. I enjoy the customizability as many others on here do. However, I would also enjoy 'retiring' from the need to do that. It's kind of annoying knowing that the first thing I have to do when I get a new phone is go home and HardSPL it and flash a new ROM. I've heard some of the newer devices are much better out the door (HD2 for example) but haven't seen this for myself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have used my Topaz with the 6.1 factory ROM for at least 2-3 months. At this time I couldn't complain. I didn't face any issues. I only started to flash new ROMs when 6.5 and later issues were available...
About retiring... I don't think you will. The need to immediately flash a new WP7 device is always given. Just imagine you got a new phone from a Telecom contract and you got all your hubs in pink...
RustyGrom said:
I think the .net CF would be a good starting point that they should add onto but it almost sounds like they're only picking and choosing pieces from it. If we've got the whole .net CF (maybe minus a few things they don't want us doing) I would be fine with that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not much a developer (it's not my profession, I just did a couple of things for fun), but, apart from performance issues which can more or less be improved in the new OS, I've seen two types of limitations with .Net CF on WM 6.x: it's been nearly impossible to make nice UI without awful performance, and there are big gaps in terms of accessing "low-level" and sometimes not so low-level stuff and hence need for PInvoke.
The first issue will probably be addressed by Silverlight and, possibly, better built-in UI controls and such. The second will probably be partly addressed by OS-level push, "live feed" APIs, which sometimes might help overcome the limitations of SNAPI. The obvious question marks are things like non-SNAPI event handling such as hardware key processing, power management, device IO etc. Theoretically, this could be done in an environment such as .Net, why not, but not in its current incarnation of CF 3.5. If they added functionality to .Net, it could make life easier for devs.
Obviously though, some things just aren't realistic in managed code, so no alternative browsers/video players for us apart from shells over MS engines (which means no .mkv support if it's not built into the OS already). It could be possible, though, if they're serious in trying to do things right this time, that they want to create those APIs/SDK together with devs. Say, it would be an awesome, albeit slow, path to sit down with CoreCodec and build a piece of the SDK on a specific case, understanding and overcoming the challenges step by step. Don't know if we can hope to get that kind of attitude though...
It's good to use .NET languages, but it is limited, at least on CompactFramework, so it's impossible to use ONLY .NET: you have to use unmanaged code for creating some things that .NET doesn't allow to.
vangrieg said:
I'm not much a developer (it's not my profession, I just did a couple of things for fun), but, apart from performance issues which can more or less be improved in the new OS, I've seen two types of limitations with .Net CF on WM 6.x: it's been nearly impossible to make nice UI without awful performance, and there are big gaps in terms of accessing "low-level" and sometimes not so low-level stuff and hence need for PInvoke.
The first issue will probably be addressed by Silverlight and, possibly, better built-in UI controls and such. The second will probably be partly addressed by OS-level push, "live feed" APIs, which sometimes might help overcome the limitations of SNAPI. The obvious question marks are things like non-SNAPI event handling such as hardware key processing, power management, device IO etc. Theoretically, this could be done in an environment such as .Net, why not, but not in its current incarnation of CF 3.5. If they added functionality to .Net, it could make life easier for devs.
Obviously though, some things just aren't realistic in managed code, so no alternative browsers/video players for us apart from shells over MS engines (which means no .mkv support if it's not built into the OS already). It could be possible, though, if they're serious in trying to do things right this time, that they want to create those APIs/SDK together with devs. Say, it would be an awesome, albeit slow, path to sit down with CoreCodec and build a piece of the SDK on a specific case, understanding and overcoming the challenges step by step. Don't know if we can hope to get that kind of attitude though...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup. I'm expecting a 'revolution' of sorts in the UI standpoint. Like I've stated previously, it sucks trying to make a good, finger-friendly UI. XNA will make game/3d creation a breeze. Silverlight will be awesome for more traditional style UIs. I'm just wondering how high level and low level they'll get. For example, if I wanted to make an app that looked exactly like the main UI of the phone would I be able to just create a panel object, give it the text for the title, text and controls on that panel, and it will take care of the placement, input control, etc? Or what if I want to go the opposite route and create a UI of my own, will I be able to do that? I'm expecting things like button inputs to be provided. It would be crazy for them not to. That's part of the benefit of standardizing the buttons, they can easily bubble those up to devs.
The leaked docs show that native APIs and unmanaged code will be available to an extent but only to OEMs and carriers. I'm sure if people make enough noise they'll back down and approve apps that make use of that for others as well if they show the need. Microsoft's corporate culture traditionally hasn't been as 'religious' as Apple's and is more willing to back down on things if pushed.
Did a search and couldn't find anything but it appears that when the Guys at Skype decided to discontinue Skype for Windows Mobile they also decided that they wouldn't be developing for WP7 any time soon.
David Flynn at apcmag.com said:
Citing a second-rate “user experience” compared to the iPhone and Android, Skype admits it has no immediate plans to release an app for Windows Phone 7.
Skype is working full steam ahead on an app for the iPad and the next-gen iPhone, but users of Windows Phone 7 will have to take a number and wait… and wait… and wait.
Skype’s Asia Pacific Vice-President Dan Neary says that Microsoft’s forthcoming smartphone OS is not a priority when it comes to mobile platforms.
“We try and focus not only where the need is but where the best experience is, and we feel that the best areas for us to develop are on the operating systems that we currently support – iPhone, Symbian, BlackBerry and now Android” Neary told APC during a press briefing in Sydney today. “We simply feel that those operating systems (have) a much better user experience”.
Neary said that while a Skype app for Windows Phone 7 “is on the roadmap, the question is how quickly we’re going to get to it. We feel that we are best best deployed on other operating systems (for now) and we’ll see how the space evolves.”
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
article here
screw skype then, does windows mobile messenger support voice chat?
C'mon now
The main part of this article was about Skype abandoning development for the current WinMobile (6.5). They were talking about which platforms were currently supported. Why would they be talking about an app for an OS that hasn't been released yet.
lordcanti86 said:
The main part of this article was about Skype abandoning development for the current WinMobile (6.5). They were talking about which platforms were currently supported. Why would they be talking about an app for an OS that hasn't been released yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
err...I interpreted it differently...to me it sounds like they're not going to bother for a while.
Neary said that while a Skype app for Windows Phone 7 “is on the roadmap, the question is how quickly we’re going to get to it. We feel that we are best best deployed on other operating systems (for now) and we’ll see how the space evolves.”
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
coupled with
Skype’s Asia Pacific Vice-President Dan Neary says that Microsoft’s forthcoming smartphone OS is not a priority when it comes to mobile platforms.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
..sound to me like they'll wait to see how well the platform takes off before considering beginning development.
welki1979 said:
err...I interpreted it differently...to me it sounds like they're not going to bother for a while.
coupled with
..sound to me like they'll wait to see how well the platform takes off before considering beginning development.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which is fine. Either wp7 will be successful and they will port it over ~3 months after release. Or wp7 will fail and it wouldn't matter either way if skype existed or not.
As an aside, anyone came across any information about kin sales?
gom99 said:
As an aside, anyone came across any information about kin sales?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually yes, but its 3rd party info. I have a friend at that Carphone place... they've had a briefing on the Kin range and are expecting units to be released to them late july apparently.
I tried to get some sort of confirmation of this but as yet all I've managed to find out came from one of the shop staff who made a comment about them being late or something. (not really sure it was mumbled quietly as he walked off)
Suprisingly enough though there is nothing on the GSM Arena site despite the fact that the HTC Mondrian is listed there (a WP7 phone).
gom99 said:
Which is fine. Either wp7 will be successful and they will port it over ~3 months after release. Or wp7 will fail and it wouldn't matter either way if skype existed or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And if every developer thinks like this, there will be zero apps for WP7 when it launches --> nobody will buy it, cause it has no apps --> nobody will make apps for it, cause it has no users --> ...
And by the way, Skype is not alone. So far I have not seen one developer, who thinks the tools offered are enough to make good applications (that means, stuff that does a little more than farts).
Silverlight etc. is fine and all, but now is not the right time for Microsoft to start over like this, hecause the competition is too far ahead. They should improve upon what they have, and make a slow transition to the new tools etc. when they can afford it.
But now it's too late anyway, they already dumped everything they had.
shaundalglish said:
And if every developer thinks like this, there will be zero apps for WP7 when it launches --> nobody will buy it, cause it has no apps --> nobody will make apps for it, cause it has no users --> ...
And by the way, Skype is not alone. So far I have not seen one developer, who thinks the tools offered are enough to make good applications (that means, stuff that does a little more than farts).
Silverlight etc. is fine and all, but now is not the right time for Microsoft to start over like this, hecause the competition is too far ahead. They should improve upon what they have, and make a slow transition to the new tools etc. when they can afford it.
But now it's too late anyway, they already dumped everything they had.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is that trying to maintain backwards compatibility with all those apps that were designed for stylus input and resistive touch screens was what allowed the competition to get so far ahead in the first place. The only thing they could have done was to start over because that forces developers to redevelop apps that are designed for finger input, compactive touch screens, and work better with the new OS.
shaundalglish said:
And if every developer thinks like this, there will be zero apps for WP7 when it launches --> nobody will buy it, cause it has no apps --> nobody will make apps for it, cause it has no users --> ...
And by the way, Skype is not alone. So far I have not seen one developer, who thinks the tools offered are enough to make good applications (that means, stuff that does a little more than farts).
Silverlight etc. is fine and all, but now is not the right time for Microsoft to start over like this, hecause the competition is too far ahead. They should improve upon what they have, and make a slow transition to the new tools etc. when they can afford it.
But now it's too late anyway, they already dumped everything they had.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe you should look at the videos from MWC and MIX 2010, then you'll see that there are some quite amazing apps in development. They demonstrated a Netflix, an Associated Press, a Seesmic, a Shazam and MLS app and a bunch of games. You can expect apps from EA Mobile, Fandango, Pandora, Foursquare, IMDB, Namco, PopCap Games, Photobucket and SPB Software just to name a few (that list is a bit longer than that) and because the developer tools are already available I expect many many more apps than that.
"Amazing"? lol yeah if bling bling is all you want...
shaundalglish said:
"Amazing"? lol yeah if bling bling is all you want...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So Netflix is bling bling? Or a game like The Harvester is also just bling bling? What about Shazam?
Oh come on... Shazam is always the first app that gets ported to any new OS, because there's nothing complicated about it. Games are of course just bling bling. And 96% of the world's population couldn't care less about Netflix.
I just prefer functionality, that's all. WP7 is not going to deliver this.
shaundalglish said:
I just prefer functionality, that's all. WP7 is not going to deliver this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You mean to say that you believe it's not going to deliver the functionality that you deem to be important. It's still going to be a great communication, social networking, maps/navigation, multimedia and gaming platform and that's what most people want from their smartphones these days. I agree with you that WP7 is missing quite a bit of features, but I don't think those missing features are deal breakers for the average consumer.
No it's not going to deliver a lot of functionality at all, regardless of which features I personally use.
shaundalglish said:
No it's not going to deliver a lot of functionality at all, regardless of which features I personally use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what features are those?
Also calling something a fart app or bling bling is misleading. The majority of apps people actually consume fall into that category.
Not that I disagree with what you're trying to say but many of the advanced apps of windows mobile are just hacks to correct the lacking default user experience of wm. I do think you're being too hardlined though.
but I definitely don't like some decisions they're making with some of the current advanced features. eg: file system, data storage, side loading.
The problems as I see it is that the APIs is to poor at the moment.
No sockets support -> Some apps will have serious problems, e.g. Skype.
No way to access Bluetooth.
Very limited access to media.
This are the main things that make me doubt on this platform. I'm fine with it being locked down, just not too much.
Should we really be bothered by such trivial issue?There are better alternative apps like Fring and Nimbuzz that perfectly connects to the skype node,allowing you to still skype and be skyped.
blackrider said:
Should we really be bothered by such trivial issue?There are better alternative apps like Fring and Nimbuzz that perfectly connects to the skype node,allowing you to still skype and be skyped.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except Fring won't be possible in WP7 either. Skype is a proprietary P2P protocol, and implementing it would require ability to manipulate sockets. One could possibly implement an http version of a client that would connect to a central server and then the server would communicate with other Skype users, but that would be difficult, costly and ultimately useless because it would only serve as a temporary workaround until socket support comes to WP7 APIs.
vangrieg said:
Except Fring won't be possible in WP7 either. Skype is a proprietary P2P protocol, and implementing it would require ability to manipulate sockets. One could possibly implement an http version of a client that would connect to a central server and then the server would communicate with other Skype users, but that would be difficult, costly and ultimately useless because it would only serve as a temporary workaround until socket support comes to WP7 APIs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Socket support for WP7 will come later but is not in initial release.
havox22 said:
Socket support for WP7 will come later but is not in initial release.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hopefully they'll hurry up, since I'm fear that I (and many others) will stand without good/any music support.
I'm a big user of Spotify, a streaming music service, which I'm sure will require Sockets to work, because it's Superior responsiveness is based on a P2P protocol. Before anyone say anything else, the phones won't share the media, but they'll download from desktop clients.
Hopefully they'll release some custom version anyway. Responsiveness won't be a problem on Mobile devices where most people have the "important" stuff in Offline cache anyways.
Today is the day that the Windows Phone team has been driving towards, and we’re very excited to say that we’ve reached the biggest milestone for our internal team – the release to manufacturing (RTM) of Windows Phone 7! While the final integration of Windows Phone 7 with our partners’ hardware, software, and networks is underway, the work of our internal engineering team is largely complete.
Windows Phone 7 is the most thoroughly tested mobile platform Microsoft has ever released. We had nearly ten thousand devices running automated tests daily, over a half million hours of active self-hosting use, over three and a half million hours of stress test passes, and eight and a half million hours of fully automated test passes. We’ve had thousands of independent software vendors and early adopters testing our software and giving us great feedback. We are ready.
I last posted on this blog when we reached the Technical Preview milestone, and we’ve received some great feedback since then which we’ve been able to respond to and improve the smart design throughout the OS. For example, folks loved the Facebook integration in the People Hub, but they also wanted ways to filter their contacts so only the Facebook friends they really know will show up in their contact list – we’ve added support for that. We’ve also made it easy to “like” a post right from the People Hub, or quickly post a message to someone’s Facebook wall directly.
This has been one of the most incredible product development efforts I’ve ever been a part of. Today’s milestone is exciting not just because of what we’ll deliver to customers later this year, but how it sets us up for success over the long term in the mobile space… we’re really just getting started.
We reached today’s milestone because of the tremendous efforts of the entire team including our partners, early adopters, and independent software developers providing feedback. I want to send a huge THANK YOU to this extended team– we couldn’t have done it without you!
by Terry Myerson
Windows Phone Blog
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows_...indows-phone-7-released-to-manufacturing.aspx
To general!
~~Tito~~
They're listening, that's great news by itself.
If they want to get this right they better be listening.
I wonder how long it will take them to move to silverlight 4 so they can get the clipboard support. Also I wonder how long before we'll see ie9 integrated into there as well.
Here's what I want to see:
1. HTML5
2. Silverlight/Flash in browser (I know flash is planned)
3. Copy/Paste
4. 3rd Party Multitasking
5. Thumb Drive Support even if it's restricted access to what's viewable.
Kloc said:
1. HTML5
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't understand why people want this so bad recently. I can't think of a single site that even has a html5 version yet alone HTML5 only. Not that I'm saying they shouldn't use it...but it's hardly on my radar of things to care about.
Just because it's the newest standard and it won't be long before sites are implementing it. I've looked at the docs and it has some pretty cool stuff built-in. I'd just like to see MS stay up with the lastest and greatest.
Kloc said:
Just because it's the newest standard and it won't be long before sites are implementing it. I've looked at the docs and it has some pretty cool stuff built-in. I'd just like to see MS stay up with the lastest and greatest.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it'll be a rather long time (5-10 yrs) before anyone major decides to really make a site really dependent on HTML5/CSS3. The reality is it takes a long time for people to migrate to newer technologies ie. a decade later and we're supporting IE6 and XP. I can see using it as an enhancement for people capable of viewing that content. But you still want your site to be designed for non-HTML5 content if you want to appeal to everyone.
From a web development point of view, you're also stepping into a mindfield as browser compatiblity is concerned.
gom99 said:
I think it'll be a rather long time (5-10 yrs) before anyone major decides to really make a site really dependent on HTML5/CSS3. The reality is it takes a long time for people to migrate to newer technologies ie. a decade later and we're supporting IE6 and XP. I can see using it as an enhancement for people capable of viewing that content. But you still want your site to be designed for non-HTML5 content if you want to appeal to everyone.
From a web development point of view, you're also stepping into a mindfield as browser compatiblity is concerned.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly I don't really care all that much. It's just because the iphone has it
Kloc said:
Honestly I don't really care all that much. It's just because the iphone has it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol yea, it's never a good idea to give Jobs something to make a snarky comment at one of his conferences. He's such a whiney brat . I don't think I've seen a single conference where he hasn't had some kind of underhanded remark to make.
I still want to know what the MS excuse de jour is for making WP7 incompatible with existing devices, especially since their site pushes some pricy Windows phones. If this oversight can't be fixed, they ought to give away or discount replacement phones.
piaqt said:
I still want to know what the MS excuse de jour is for making WP7 incompatible with existing devices, especially since their site pushes some pricy Windows phones. If this oversight can't be fixed, they ought to give away or discount replacement phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not really an excuse. If you sat down and thought about it you'd come up with the answer. If you made it for the devices today you'd be making it for older hardware and you'd have to limit what your OS could do based on the crop of current windows phones (aside from the hd2 they're pretty slow).
By setting it's requirements MS ensures that they provide a certain baseline experience to their end users. By having a standard for minimum buttons you're making it easy for consumers to pick up any wp7 regardless of what maker and have a consistent experience.
It's not an oversight. I don't see why they need discount replacement phones, this would be a carrier decision anyway...kind of like a cash for klunkers program.
piaqt said:
I still want to know what the MS excuse de jour is for making WP7 incompatible with existing devices, especially since their site pushes some pricy Windows phones. If this oversight can't be fixed, they ought to give away or discount replacement phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a fresh start and they really needed it. They decided to make a baseline and all the window's phone out today don't meet the requirements. I think this is a good move by MS. If you can't afford to buy a new phone then just used your 6.5 device until you can. If they had made them all upgradable we would still have the bad fragmentation that Windows Mobile has today. I'm sure there will be cheaper model, heavily subsidizes devices that will hit the market so you'll have your chance.
wwweeeeee.
Singing ....
gimmi gimmi gimmi my phone after midnight, plz wont somebody give me there Win Phone 7 away.
Gimmi gimmi gimmi a 5 inch display, duel core and without a delay" =)))
*gaahh*
...i just got to sing again =)
....and they where singing, by by foul fruit goodbye, calld on Jobs but the call got hanged up lost connection somehow...
definately a good sign for microsoft...as of right now the road seems bright
we shall see though...
HD2?
So do I understand it correctly? Even no windows mobile 7 for the HD2? I'd assume that the HD2 does meet the hardware requirements.
msportel77 said:
So do I understand it correctly? Even no windows mobile 7 for the HD2? I'd assume that the HD2 does meet the hardware requerements.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope the HD2 does not have the right hardware buttons. It's probably the only device that may be possible to get ported to WP7 by us here though.
msportel77 said:
So do I understand it correctly? Even no windows mobile 7 for the HD2? I'd assume that the HD2 does meet the hardware requerements.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No it doesn't... it has 5 buttons in the front of the device ... not the 3 standart displacement required by MS...
Kloc said:
Here's what I want to see:
1. HTML5
2. Silverlight/Flash in browser (I know flash is planned)
3. Copy/Paste
4. 3rd Party Multitasking
5. Thumb Drive Support even if it's restricted access to what's viewable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I consign all of those things lol.
Hello? Is Windows Mobile so Irrelevant that we just don't get Skyfire anymore?
Skyfire is charging iphone customers for what we have been using for years, and yet now we can't use it? I'm pissed. Their servers are overloaded because they pre render the pages, and I understand that, but to simply forget about us is wrong. We didn't pay for it so we don't count anymore?
Are we going to get Skyfire function back? If so, is it going to be intermittent because Apple people jump all over it again?
SpinalRemains said:
Hello? Is Windows Mobile so Irrelevant that we just don't get Skyfire anymore?
Skyfire is charging iphone customers for what we have been using for years, and yet now we can't use it? I'm pissed. Their servers are overloaded because they pre render the pages, and I understand that, but to simply forget about us is wrong. We didn't pay for it so we don't count anymore?
Are we going to get Skyfire function back? If so, is it going to be intermittent because Apple people jump all over it again?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm pretty upset about it too, but seeing as most devs are leaving WM for WP7, I doubt that we'll see this working for us again in the near future. Maybe it'll be working again when they add more servers to cope with the new demand. Only time will tell. I know I've got my fingers crossed.
Petition to bring Skyfire back to WinMo http www ipetitions com/petition/skyfireforwinmo/
Thanks for the link. I don't actually believe it will do anything, but what the hell right?
No one is even upset that ppl are paying for it. I know I would gladly fork over 3 bucks for Skyfire. It's the way they did it. One day we're happy and using and the next day Apple is their new customer. That's just mobile ass rape at its finest if you ask me.
I read a user on here comment some time ago "I will never use a server based browser" in reference to Skyfire. And now I see why. They can decide to drop support whenever they want, and you are completely screwed, and don't even know what is going on.
Interesting, Skyfire became the No. 3 best selling paid app within 5 hours on the Apple app store, before it had to be pulled due to the Skyfire servers being overloaded.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/209765/apple_iphone_users_overwhelm_flashfriendly_app_skyfire.html
Sad to see so many people flocking to what seems to me a developer that does not support it product. I understand WM (at least versions before WP7) is a sinking ship, and a similar thing will likely never happen to the iPhoney. But it seems pretty crappy for a developer to suddenly drop its software apparently without warning or any kind of announcement/communication.
Oh it's completely personal. They rendered 3 quicklinks on my Home Page useless. It doesn't get any more personal. Messing with someone's mobile device is like messing with their woman, or their car. It's just wrong. Send me a dam Email or somethin. Is that too hard?
Wow that's terrible. I've been using OperaMini for some time now since it came out of beta. But I guess some people want flash to work in their browser.
The Uzard browser might be a good replacement:
http://www.uzard.com/en/down/download_windowsmobile.asp
(i also attached a cab)
i think it might have to be installed on the storage card to work.
Skyfire hasn't even bothered to post an announcement on their website. In fact, WM is still listed on their site as being supported, and Skyfire is still on the MS Marketplace. This is terrible communication. I hope they screw iPhone users just like WM users. Unlikely, but if iPhone users are dumb enough to buy into this, then they deserve what's coming to them.
how.to.get.WMplayer.7.?in.tilt2?
japper88 said:
Wow that's terrible. I've been using OperaMini for some time now since it came out of beta. But I guess some people want flash to work in their browser.
The Uzard browser might be a good replacement:
http://www.uzard.com/en/down/download_windowsmobile.asp
(i also attached a cab)
i think it might have to be installed on the storage card to work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does this allow the flash player to work, like with skyfire?
I was wondering what happened, since I am getting the servers filled message for the past few days.
So many websites now days require the flash players to work properly, Opera just isn't cutting it anymore.
StrangeShadow said:
Does this allow the flash player to work, like with skyfire?
I was wondering what happened, since I am getting the servers filled message for the past few days.
So many websites now days require the flash players to work properly, Opera just isn't cutting it anymore.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried uZard, and yes, it transcodes Flash content same way that Skyfire did. but it was painfully slow. Even when rendering non-Flash webpages.
SKyfire News Update
For anyone interested, Skyfire announced that they were ending support for WM and Symbian devices at the end of this year. There is talk of offering it again, but for a price this time. It would be a welcome cost, for me, as their 1.x version is more feature rich than the new 2.x version available currently for iPhone users and soon for Blackberry 6, Meego, and WP7. Legacy support will end in about six weeks. Uzard is pretty much the only other option, albeit a crappy one so far. It's still in beta, but hopefully the final product is better than the current version.
R.I.P. Skyfire
You will be missed.
SOURCE ARTICLE
It works really well, doesn't seam to keep cookies, etc, so no trouble having to delete it after use too. Doesn't seam to offer a copy paste feature or selection tool though, if you want to copy some text from a web page.
cajunflavoredbob said:
For anyone interested, Skyfire announced that they were ending support for WM and Symbian devices at the end of this year. There is talk of offering it again, but for a price this time. It would be a welcome cost, for me, as their 1.x version is more feature rich than the new 2.x version available currently for iPhone users and soon for Blackberry 6, Meego, and WP7. Legacy support will end in about six weeks. Uzard is pretty much the only other option, albeit a crappy one so far. It's still in beta, but hopefully the final product is better than the current version.
R.I.P. Skyfire
You will be missed.
SOURCE ARTICLE
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I assume that we will be left without a flash browser in the next few months. Skyfire left us hangin on for a year without an update before finally tellin WM users they were done with us and if u research u'll find that UZARD has not given us an update in almost a year. The UZARD WEB S & UZARD WEB H they have been showin on their site for 8 month that were gonna be the socalled next updates for WM were never released. My guess is they are takin a page from Skyfires book and was waitin on WP7. I personally do not wanna have to install XDANDROID just to run android apps on WM. I think our best bet is to find someone to port the android version of SKYFIRE if we want to continue using a flash equiped browser on WM or get someone to port FLASH10.1 from android. Maybe someone should start a bounty thread for these android ports.
I allways installed it but never used it. Opera mini is way better
Skyfire is working for me currently. I'm enjoying it while it's available. I would certainly pay for it if they decided to charge for continuing support.
cajunflavoredbob said:
Skyfire is working for me currently. I'm enjoying it while it's available. I would certainly pay for it if they decided to charge for continuing support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
can You still use Skyfire ? in my phone it can't connect to the derver.
jsaid said:
can You still use Skyfire ? in my phone it can't connect to the derver.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope. It stopped working earlier this week for me. They were shutting it off region by region. Everything is expected to go dark for legacy support by 31 December this year.
Hi guys/gals
Hope everyone had a nice X Mas.
I'm still looking for a replacement browser or something so that I can run Flash on my TP2 like I did with Skyfire. Anyone have any solutions besides that Uzard one? That one was just too clunky and slow. I really do not want to upgrade my device because I have come to love the archaic TP2, but not having flash is really a downer.
I didn't notice that they pulled support until some time later. Honestly, I got very frustrated with how slow the "fastest" browser was. It used to be good, but after awhile it just became frustrating. Once I discovered Opera Mobile 10, I almost never used it anymore. (Call me crazy, but Opera Mobile 10 is my favorite mobile browser, I just love the interface and it may not be super-fast but it's not too bad in that respect.) (I never really cared for Opera Mini on anything other than dumbphones-- having to deal with java apps, I think, is kind of a pain. But, that's just a matter of personal taste.)
I briefly used a Nexus S, and I never even bothered to install the Android version of Skyfire on it. It's just my personal opinion that there are better browsers out there. I guess I don't use flash that often, and, honestly, Skyfire didn't do a great job of it anyway. Sometimes it was useful, but usually it was clumsy and difficult.
It had a time that it was a great browser, but it seemed like they reached a point where they stopped listening to what their users wanted. Like the whole giant text thing that never worked consistently. A lot of people on their forum said that they hated it, but they never gave us the option to disable at (at least while I was using it).
That being said... Yeah, they're jackasses for just leaving us high and dry when we were the ones that got them started. I guess they think they're appealing to a wider audience, but when the non-technical users realize that server-side browsing has problems, they'll stop using it, and when those of us that are using WinMo 6.x are finally forced to use Android or WP7... well, I don't know about anybody else, but I sure won't be using their crappy browser, knowing that they're going to turn tail and run at the first sign that they might make a buck elsewhere.
I'm not an enormously technical person, but this is just the way it seems to be to me. In a way it kind of reminds me of how RIM bought Torch and we lost Iris. Not that I would expect RIM to continue to develop a browser for a competitor, but as a user it just sucked when that happened because we lost a pretty good browser. But in that case, at least, we can still download the old cab files and use it, we just won't get updates.
Is it just me or around October did we not get word that Flash for Windows phone 7 was coming but since then its like nothing was ever said. Does anyone have any more insight on this or was it all just a big rumour that's now being ignored?
Well, there's not much talk about it, although it was mentioned officially several times. Flash will come when Adobe delivers a version with decent performance (which may be just a tiny bit earlier than when cows come home).
There's not much talk about it because there's not much to talk about. It's one of the topics to discuss for the blogosphere, especially since Steve Jobs criticized Flash in public, but lack of Flash isn't really that big of a deal in practice, so you don't see waves of complaints really.
vangrieg said:
Well, there's not much talk about it, although it was mentioned officially several times. Flash will come when Adobe delivers a version with decent performance (which may be just a tiny bit earlier than when cows come home).
There's not much talk about it because there's not much to talk about. It's one of the topics to discuss for the blogosphere, especially since Steve Jobs criticized Flash in public, but lack of Flash isn't really that big of a deal in practice, so you don't see waves of complaints really.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes it is a very big deal.
Big amount of internet data is not available for the user, including videos and websites built on flash. There are many things which matter to me and I can't see them.
The whole things looks like intentional - probably lazyness. There's no reason to not support flash these days.
doministry said:
Yes it is a very big deal.
Big amount of internet data is not available for the user, including videos and websites built on flash. There are many things which matter to me and I can't see them.
The whole things looks like intentional - probably lazyness. There's no reason to not support flash these days.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh come on. How many smartphones do actually support Flash properly? Sure, Android does to some extent, but not nearly on all the devices out there and it's far from fluid on the majority of the ones that do. Apple's iPhone (or iPad) doesn't. WM6.5 doesn't. Crackberries doesn't. The list goes on.
While Flash would be a great addition I wouldn't want it unless it was fast and full-featured. Playback of choppy videos is not Flash support. It would be better to just hand off the H264 stream to the built-in video-player, just like the YT plugin does. Support for Flash games or apps is a completely different beast.
Glaring
doministry said:
Yes it is a very big deal.
Big amount of internet data is not available for the user, including videos and websites built on flash. There are many things which matter to me and I can't see them.
The whole things looks like intentional - probably lazyness. There's no reason to not support flash these days.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree totally. On the way to an ATT store to check on some cases, I logged into Hallmark.com to buy an ecard for my daughter AND COULD NOT PREVIEW any of them. I then went to check the weather maps at NOAA.gov and could not see any of the looped maps. I then tried to go to publishers clearing house to fill out some lotto tickets and couldn't because the site didn't detect Flash on my phone. This happened all within a few minutes. Don't anyone try to tell me it is not a big deal, IT IS!!!!!! MS has delivered a hobbled browser experience in WP7. It is their responsibilty to work with Adobe to fix this, we are the customers of MS, not Adobe.
emigrating said:
WM6.5 doesn't.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, Opera on HD2 supported Flash, although it was disabled by default and you had to meddle some settings to turn it on, but I never ever ran into the need.
On the iPhone this was never an issue for me as it handled video on most sites, and ran those videos in iPod, which, for me, is a vastly superior method to showing them in-browser.
On WP7, you can view YouTube videos just fine, which is the majority of videos on the web, but of course you'll stumble into cases when it won't work. How important is it? I personally don't care. You may, so your mileage may vary.
But of all the issues with WP7 this one is least discussed in reality. Which does show that it's more of a chat topic than anything else, IMO.
Flash would be a better marketing point than a benefit to the user on a phone sized device. MS should implement Silverlight and Flash in browser just for marketing alone!
On a tablet, thats' a different matter. imo.
vangrieg said:
Well, Opera on HD2 supported Flash, although it was disabled by default and you had to meddle some settings to turn it on, but I never ever ran into the need.
On the iPhone this was never an issue for me as it handled video on most sites, and ran those videos in iPod, which, for me, is a vastly superior method to showing them in-browser.
On WP7, you can view YouTube videos just fine, which is the majority of videos on the web, but of course you'll stumble into cases when it won't work. How important is it? I personally don't care. You may, so your mileage may vary.
But of all the issues with WP7 this one is least discussed in reality. Which does show that it's more of a chat topic than anything else, IMO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know Opera did, to some extent, support Flash on WM. But I didn't list it because it wasn't enabled by default, and even after setting it up myself it was a very flawed experience.
As for videos on WP7, the YT plugin does fine. I wish it would extend support to other sites, but I agree it's much better than displaying video in-line on the webpage itself.
But forgetting about video for a second, Flash is used for a lot of other purposes and while it would be great to have this all in the browser I would only want it if it worked perfectly and didn't slow down the entire browsing experience like it does on certain other platforms. Now, time will tell, but I have a feeling Flash presence is being replaced by HTML5 and to an extent Silverlight in which case, by the time Flash is viable on WP7 there would be no need for it.
Flash lite was on WM since 6.1 and worked on IE.
Flash isn't on WP7 because of security reasons they say.
I heard a few months ago that Adobe and Microsoft were in talks about putting Flash on WP7. I imagine that if it's taking this long, there is probably talk about accessing native code or having it actually built into the browser instead of being a plug-in.
my guess is they are going to wait until the "Mango" update for flash, as HTML5 and Silverlight ni the browser are rumored to come with that update as well.
emigrating said:
Oh come on. How many smartphones do actually support Flash properly? Sure, Android does to some extent, but not nearly on all the devices out there and it's far from fluid on the majority of the ones that do. Apple's iPhone (or iPad) doesn't. WM6.5 doesn't. Crackberries doesn't. The list goes on.
While Flash would be a great addition I wouldn't want it unless it was fast and full-featured. Playback of choppy videos is not Flash support. It would be better to just hand off the H264 stream to the built-in video-player, just like the YT plugin does. Support for Flash games or apps is a completely different beast.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry but you are talking around the topic.
Today Android - with the biggest increase in market, supports Flash very nicely, as well as the biggest on marketshare - Symbian - supports this FOR YEARS.
So stop this BS about "almost nobody supports this". And why this argument? Isn't WP7 "a new thing"?
WM6.5 was also supporting flash and on my SE X2 I could see alot from what I wanted. Another BS.
And the performance... Stop this nonsense. There are pages which are just a blank spot while many other platforms just show the damned content.
I know you want to justify every **** from MS but it starts to be annoying.
Maybe you should ask MS to cut some more features in order to gain perfect performance?
Main issue? Adobe outsourced their development to india...
I really do hope that browser support for Flash comes to WP7.
Like any other additional feature I want, I'm willing to be patient. There's still a lot that will need to be one over time. And I would rather have it done right, than just having something out that is slow or clunky.
As a N1 user with Flash for the past few months, I can say, it's not choppy, slow or anything like that. It was actually implemented very well. I still use my N1 for travelling instead of my Focus because it has google nav and flash (ie I can watch videos online from anywhere, not just YouTube). I love watching Top Gear Reruns..
The only downside to Flash on Froyo was not only did you get the good (videos and flash content) but the bad (flash pop ups). But it also had a setting so that you could load any flash content manually with a single click.
I'm on board for Flash on WP7 for sure.
I had time to look at this again and from what i see adobe is about to release flash 10.2 so maybe the wait is to bring it out in line with that esp as its much less power Hungary and more secure than 10.1
Full flash support isn't necessary and would probably be pretty crappy like on Android. I'd rather just have a Skyfire browser on WP7.
I don't understand why people are saying Flash on Android (froyo) is crappy. On my N1 it was pretty much flawless. Did other versions of froyo that are locked down by carriers maybe muck it up?
legbuh said:
I don't understand why people are saying Flash on Android (froyo) is crappy. On my N1 it was pretty much flawless. Did other versions of froyo that are locked down by carriers maybe muck it up?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nppe, flawless here on the Vibrant, but wait someone will jump here from G1 and tell us all it is ****ty
lumpaywk said:
I had time to look at this again and from what i see adobe is about to release flash 10.2 so maybe the wait is to bring it out in line with that esp as its much less power Hungary and more secure than 10.1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most likely not - from what I gather the current Internet Explorer does not allow plugins. This means Flash will not be possible until Microsoft updates IE - something I doubt will happen until the end of the year.
eternalemb said:
Full flash support isn't necessary and would probably be pretty crappy like on Android. I'd rather just have a Skyfire browser on WP7.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But what good is Flash if it doesn't give full support? Watching videos? There are much better ways to do this, like simply pass over the video stream to the internal player (as long as the underlaying format is supported).
As for the general crappiness of Flash on Android; sure there are devices/installs/ROMs where it's pretty much flawless, but OOB on just about all devices it sucks.