[freudling]

I think I might. I've given it a good go and can't put it down. It's pretty damn nice. It'll run Windows Phone 8... LTE...

I love the design. It's just fun, and super fast! MS has really got some awesome hardware acceleration. Android is just a piece of crap. So slow and laggy. The pinch to zoom action and screen transitions are buttery smooth. They're iOS caliber. My hats are off to MS. If a few more really awesome handsets can come out, WP has a chance.

Oh, and, by the way, don't listen to dorks like Topolsky at the Verge. The screen, despite the spec being a much lower resolution than the iPhone Retina Display... it absolutely rocks. Everything is clear and crisp and the color saturation is sick. And in direct sunlight it kills on Apple's IPS screens.

Nokia's got something here. I can't wait for this to evolve. Finally, an alternative to iOS. I still love my iPad and iPod Touch, but I need something else in my life too. This might be it.

[freudling]

Cool review:

Nokia Lumia 900 Review - Watch CNET's Video Review

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Oh, and, by the way, don't listen to dorks like Topolsky at the Verge. The screen, despite the spec being a much lower resolution than the iPhone Retina Display... it absolutely rocks. Everything is clear and crisp and the color saturation is sick. And in direct sunlight it kills on Apple's IPS screens.

Topolsky's review

Let me just put this bluntly: I think it’s time to stop giving Windows Phone a pass. I think it’s time to stop talking about how beautifully designed it is, and what a departure it’s been for Microsoft, and how hard the company is working to add features. I am very aware of the hard work and dedication Microsoft has put into this platform, but at the end of the day, Windows Phone is just not as competitive with iOS and Android as it should be right now.

Before you cry foul, keep in mind that I went into this review wanting to fall madly in love with this phone. But like a book with a beautiful jacket and a plot full of holes, I found myself wanting more. A lot more.

Doesn't sound "dorkish" to me, and he makes it perfectly clear in his Wrap-Up that the display is certainly not the issue.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Cool review:

Nokia Lumia 900 Review - Watch CNET's Video Review

Yep:

in my view, Nokia has provided a great handset on a platform that's frankly still immature, but with the camera and call quality, it has left room for the upcoming Titan II and its jaw-dropping camera to do a better job. We'll have to wait until we review that phone to compare.
In the meantime, it's Microsoft's turn to help out Nokia by issuing software features that will make Windows Phone a smoother, smarter, and stronger OS that can compete more completely against the much more mature Android and iOS.

Sounds familiar, just like with all the Android products where the Real Thing is just around the corner...it'll be there with the next update...imminently...for sure this time.

Except that update never comes, or when it does, iOS has already shifted to the next level.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by freudling 

The pinch to zoom action and screen transitions are buttery smooth. They're iOS caliber. My hats are off to MS.

Your hats are off to the biggest software company in the world for catching up to iOS after 5 years? You seem easily impressed. At least by anyone other than Apple.

Originally Posted by freudling 

I still love my iPad and iPod Touch, but I need something else in my life too.

I'm not sure a phone is going to complete you.
I cant see the point in having a (smart)phone AND an iPod Touch. What was wrong with the iPhone again?

[OreoCookie]

My brother has a Windows Phone 7 smartphone, and one of the biggest shortcomings of Windows Phone 7 phones is the lack of a retina screen. Once you go Retina, you never want to go back (I don't have an iPhone, but I have an iPod touch with a Retina screen).

I kinda like the overall user interface concept of Windows Phone 7 (terrible name, by the way), but due to its very nature, apps feel »bolted on« as if you're switching modes.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Doesn't sound "dorkish" to me, and he makes it perfectly clear in his Wrap-Up that the display is certainly not the issue.

A few weeks ago, I used a Windows Phone as my primary phone for about a month (HTC HD7 hardware). Topolsky's review pretty much jives with my opinion. The Lumia 900 is a beautiful piece of hardware, but the software experience of WP7 is shallow right now, and beautiful hardware can't make up for that.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I kinda like the overall user interface concept of Windows Phone 7 (terrible name, by the way), but due to its very nature, apps feel »bolted on« as if you're switching modes.

Exactly. Unless an app developer goes for the full WP7 side-scrolling experience, the app doesn't feel part of the system. And, if they *do* go full WP7, there isn't much opportunity to make your app feel distinctly your's.

[lpkmckenna]

Peter Bright at Ars Technica says what needs to be said: buying the Lumia 900 is buying into a platform that may not get necessary bug fixes and updates even when they are available.

I am utterly amazed that phone makers let carriers push them around, but the lack of update certainty by makers themselves makes it hard for me to feel sorry for them.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

Peter Bright at Ars Technica says what needs to be said: buying the Lumia 900 is buying into a platform that may not get necessary bug fixes and updates even when they are available.

… although MS is still doing a better job than Android. Also when it comes to fragmentation.

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

I am utterly amazing that phone makers let carriers push them around, but the lack of update certainty by makers themselves makes it hard for me to feel sorry for them.

I think most of them were of the mindset that they sell phones to mobile phone carriers rather than customers. They rely on the sales of carriers where they feature a particular phone to make money. This means they really have a hard time to compete against companies who make phones people really, really want.

[freudling]

Have any of you used the Lumia 900? Let me guess, silence. Until you've used it... you know the rest. Topolsky DID knock the display in his video review.

I have used this phone and am impressed for all the reasons mentioned. The screen is blow away. The reason Android sucks is because of how slow it is and the fact it's an iOS rip job. Most of the Apps are horrid. It's brutal. I was excited about with the Galaxy Tab over a year ago but it hasn't evolved at all. It's a slapped together OS.

WP7 is different. It's the first mobile OS outside of iOS that is really fast and smooth and you don't need a gazillion core processor just to boot it up. WP7 runs on single cores and it runs circles around anything Android. I predict it will start grabbing market share, and this will be further strengthened by Win 8. The tablets are going to hit soon as well. I don't know what the ultimate situation is going to be, but it's not going away for the time being.

[turtle777]

Nah, I can't get all the apps that I want.

Pass.

-t

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Have any of you used the Lumia 900? Let me guess, silence. Until you've used it... you know the rest.

The criticism of Topolsky and others concerns the operating system, not the hardware. The hardware of the Lumia 800 and 900 has received a lot of praise from all sides, including John Gruber, for instance. (Although I would prefer the 800 since 4+ inch phones feel too large in my hand.) The main criticism is the operating system, and then you really can draw your conclusions from other Windows Phone 7 devices.

Originally Posted by freudling 

WP7 runs on single cores and it runs circles around anything Android. I predict it will start grabbing market share, …

Many a good product did not garner market share, webOS and BeOS are cases in point. Execution is as important as originality, and Microsoft botched those. If you are the underdog and you're competing with one competitor that makes a phone almost everybody wants (Apple's iOS) and phones with an OS that is »free« (Android), both of which have a substantial lead, you need to make a big effort. Microsoft did not work out deals with carriers to promote Windows Phone 7 phones and they also were not successful to ensure Microsoft is in control of the software experience. And unlike Apple, Microsoft does not iterate Windows Phone 7 rapidly. Even the name is hideous: why do you want to taint such a new and admittedly beautiful OS by the name Windows? And a name that makes any reference to the OS cumbersome (»It's a Windows Phone 7 phone.«). Microsoft's effort will fail, because it botches the execution more than anything else.

Originally Posted by freudling 

… this will be further strengthened by Win 8. The tablets are going to hit soon as well. I don't know what the ultimate situation is going to be, but it's not going away for the time being.

I think it's a ginormous mistake to force the Windows Phone team to switch to the regular Windows kernel within one release when Windows Phone hasn't gained a strong foothold in the market. I see no technical advantages at this point for such a decision. Tablets are a whole different discussion, and I'd like to factor them out.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Have any of you used the Lumia 900? Let me guess, silence. Until you've used it... you know the rest. Topolsky DID knock the display in his video review.

Yes, in the text review, as well.

But he made a point that the screen was NOT the deciding factor: Windows Phone was.

Mind, before you go calling me an apologist:

I WANT Windows Phone to be good. I WANT it to succeed. I see it as the real alternative to iOS: it's not derivative; it has a different focus; it is appealing in many ways. The hardware is great. I love the looks of the Nokias.

I think it's important that there be a real alternative to iOS, especially one so different, lest Apple eventually succumb to the clamoring by the unwashed masses for iOS to be more things to more people, rather than being excellent at what it does.

But shipping half-baked software five years after the market has been completely reset to iOS standards is simply not going to cut it.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

I WANT Windows Phone to be good. I WANT it to succeed. I see it as the real alternative to iOS: it's not derivative; it has a different focus; it is appealing in many ways. The hardware is great. I love the looks of the Nokias.

I think it's important that there be a real alternative to iOS, especially one so different, lest Apple eventually succumb to the clamoring by the unwashed masses for iOS to be more things to more people, rather than being excellent at what it does.

Seconded.
If it weren't for the strong competition in the mobile space, we would have to pay for iOS upgrades and for sure we wouldn't have a yearly OS release schedule.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

The criticism of Topolsky and others concerns the operating system, not the hardware. The hardware of the Lumia 800 and 900 has received a lot of praise from all sides, including John Gruber, for instance. (Although I would prefer the 800 since 4+ inch phones feel too large in my hand.) The main criticism is the operating system, and then you really can draw your conclusions from other Windows Phone 7 devices.

Many a good product did not garner market share, webOS and BeOS are cases in point. Execution is as important as originality, and Microsoft botched those. If you are the underdog and you're competing with one competitor that makes a phone almost everybody wants (Apple's iOS) and phones with an OS that is »free« (Android), both of which have a substantial lead, you need to make a big effort. Microsoft did not work out deals with carriers to promote Windows Phone 7 phones and they also were not successful to ensure Microsoft is in control of the software experience. And unlike Apple, Microsoft does not iterate Windows Phone 7 rapidly. Even the name is hideous: why do you want to taint such a new and admittedly beautiful OS by the name Windows? And a name that makes any reference to the OS cumbersome (»It's a Windows Phone 7 phone.«). Microsoft's effort will fail, because it botches the execution more than anything else.

I think it's a ginormous mistake to force the Windows Phone team to switch to the regular Windows kernel within one release when Windows Phone hasn't gained a strong foothold in the market. I see no technical advantages at this point for such a decision. Tablets are a whole different discussion, and I'd like to factor them out.

I think you're missing some things here. First, there was a comment that Topolsky did NOT criticize the screen. My reply to that was that he did, in fact, knock it. That's it. End of story.

Paraphrasing him from the review:

So it's not that high of a resolution... The resolution is not that high on the device. Coupled with its size you can really see the pixelation and jagged edges in the text. As with many AMOLED displays the colors seem really over-saturated to me and that can be somewhat jarring. White text on black particularly looks bad to my eyes.

Looks like people are blasting Joshua and The Verge for his Lumia 900 review. I'm not alone in my criticism of the way he seemed biased when he reviewed it.

Enough. Please. Enough About The Anti MS Bullshit | The Verge Forums

Do you know what else? None of you, including me, know what's going to be up in mobile 2 years from now. We just don't. Things are changing that fast. Android has been on the ascent for the past 1.5 years... it went from literally 0% marketshare to dominating the entire industry in just 2 years, and the carnage it left behind... RIM, etc. is hard to completely predict.Memba HTC? Well, the once recent hot Android handset maker is struggling big time. They might not even be in business by the end of the year.

But Android might start declining as people move away from it to iOS and alternatives. WP could be the alternative. Why? It's unique, fast, and is backed by the biggest name in computers: Microsoft. Like them or hate them... BeOS, WebOS... Microsoft holds the lions share of the PC OS market. That's a big advantage to them. Nobody else has that foothold on the PC industry like MS, not even Apple. Their OS and Office products are a license for them to print money. They will keep hanging around until they get it right because they have money to burn. Nobody else does.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by freudling 

I think you're missing some things here. First, there was a comment that Topolsky did NOT criticize the screen. My reply to that was that he did, in fact, knock it. That's it. End of story.

Reading comprehension fail.

I said that "he makes it perfectly clear in his Wrap-Up that the display is certainly not the issue."

In this language, that does NOT mean that the display is not a problem; it means that the display quality is not the deciding factor in judging the device.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Reading comprehension fail.

I said that "he makes it perfectly clear in his Wrap-Up that the display is certainly not the issue."

In this language, that does NOT mean that the display is not a problem; it means that the display quality is not the deciding factor in judging the device.

I don't care what that blabbering geek says in his wrap up. His reviews, just like most reviews over at Engadget, are bloated, contradictory, and confusing. He made it very clear, without question, both in his tone of voice and by what he said in the short review video that the screen has major shortcomings. If he then says the screen didn't really have anything to do with his overall score and recommendation, well, you've just been Topolskied. He's an Apple fanboy. His review of Apple products always glosses over the bad. Like the iPad 3. He never really got into how much longer it takes to charge, or that it got bloated and fat. Nope. Just another 9.whatever out of 10.

And the same people who criticize WP for not having many Apps criticize Android for having mostly crap Apps. Whatever suits the person's agenda at the time I guess...

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by freudling 

But Android might start declining as people move away from it to iOS and alternatives. WP could be the alternative. Why? It's unique, fast, and is backed by the biggest name in computers: Microsoft. Like them or hate them... BeOS, WebOS... Microsoft holds the lions share of the PC OS market. That's a big advantage to them. Nobody else has that foothold on the PC industry like MS, not even Apple. Their OS and Office products are a license for them to print money. They will keep hanging around until they get it right because they have money to burn. Nobody else does.

Android is succeeding for one reason only: Google gives it away free. Even if MS does this (Can't see it), Android has too much headstart, too many apps and established devs (and of course its still a long, long way behind iOS in that department).

Windows for the PC WAS a license to print money, its still doing ok but its in decline now. Unless they do something genuinely amazing, Office and Exchange is going to be the future of MS. Maybe Xbox as well. There is only one tech company with a license to print money these days.

Nowadays consumers see Windows as synonymous with viruses and malware and we all know how important consumers are when it comes to selling phones. I don't see that helping them move units. Then of course there is the very real chance that if they haven't gained 5%-10% market share by this time next year they will give up on it and start over again. Or just give up on it and concentrate on Office and Xbox.

As an aside, if the rumours about the next gen console specs are anywhere near accurate, iOS hardware is likely to eclipse them before the next hardware upgrades and if that happens then Xbox and Playstation are in some jeopardy. Carry your console (and/or controller) in your pocket and stream games to any AppleTV? Yes please.

As for hardware, I certainly like the look of the Lumia. Probably because it looks like an iPod Mini/2nd gen Nano in the way its built from an anodised aluminium tube. Is it just me or have pics of the Lumia been circulating for a very long time already? Why has it taken so long to get to market? I'm sure I saw images almost a year ago, maybe even longer.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by freudling 

And the same people who criticize WP for not having many Apps criticize Android for having mostly crap Apps. Whatever suits the person's agenda at the time I guess...

Are you trying to imply that these points of view are somehow opposed or mutually exclusive? What were you saying about reading comprehension before?

WP7 has no apps. Android has lots of apps but most of them suck. No agendas involved, those are simple facts.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by freudling 

I think you're missing some things here. First, there was a comment that Topolsky did NOT criticize the screen. My reply to that was that he did, in fact, knock it. That's it. End of story.

Paraphrasing him from the review:

So it's not that high of a resolution... The resolution is not that high on the device. Coupled with its size you can really see the pixelation and jagged edges in the text. As with many AMOLED displays the colors seem really over-saturated to me and that can be somewhat jarring. White text on black particularly looks bad to my eyes.

And? The lack of a high-res screen really sets WP7 back to pre-iPhone 4 times. But the screen of a single phone has little to do with the overall success of the platform. That's due to software and »marketing« issues (read the many articles by WP7 fans complaining that customers have been steered away from WP7 phones to the Android phone of the week).

Originally Posted by freudling 

Memba HTC? Well, the once recent hot Android handset maker is struggling big time. They might not even be in business by the end of the year.

But Android might start declining as people move away from it to iOS and alternatives. WP could be the alternative. Why? It's unique, fast, and is backed by the biggest name in computers: Microsoft. Like them or hate them... BeOS, WebOS...

If you have to rely on other people failing to succeed, oh boy, you are in trouble, big time. Microsoft is moving way too slowly and does not take the lessons Apple has learnt to heart (here: make users happy!). It took a long time to ship the few updates and updating wasn't always painless (my brother had to jump through some hoops and do some computer gymnastics normal people cannot be expected to be able to do).

Again, I reiterate what I've said many times before and I'm not alone with this opinion: I really hope MS gets its act together and fares better. Because I think Android brings very little to the table for users: aesthetics aside, I'm not willing to spend $$$ for a phone and having to pray that my one-year-old phone gets the update for the next version of Android. Unlike Windows Phone, it also brings very little innovation to the table (Android's cloud integration was better, though).

Microsoft has not monetized Exchange, for instance: the iPhone has better Exchange integration right now than WP7! That's almost as embarrassing as the lack of a native e-mail client in RIM's PlayBook.

Originally Posted by freudling 

Microsoft holds the lions share of the PC OS market. That's a big advantage to them. Nobody else has that foothold on the PC industry like MS, not even Apple. Their OS and Office products are a license for them to print money. They will keep hanging around until they get it right because they have money to burn. Nobody else does.

The fact that they have a 90+ % market share for PCs doesn't help them one bit in the phone market where their market share is in the single-digit percent range - just like MS' dominance of the PC market didn't help them conquer the music player market.

If you read/listen to things said in the phone industry, Microsoft does not even come up anymore. Again, I wish that MS were more successful with their efforts, but right now, they're not and it doesn't look as if that's changing any time soon.

Originally Posted by freudling 

And the same people who criticize WP for not having many Apps criticize Android for having mostly crap Apps. Whatever suits the person's agenda at the time I guess...

Just look at where people make money with apps: it's almost exclusively iOS. Independent developers don't make money selling Android or WP7 apps. Enterprises also don't switch to either WP7 or Android: WP7 isn't on their radar and Android is too fragmented. So yes, in both cases, the apps are part of the problem of the platform, but for different reasons. Most big companies nowadays (in Germany I know for sure) have plans to integrate iOS devices into parts of their businesses, e. g. apps that tie directly into their inventory system or big newspapers which want to bring their »papers« to the iPad. That's a huge investment and once it's made, it'll be very hard to undo for Microsoft or Android. In that sense, Windows 8 is probably already too late.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by freudling 

I think I might. I've given it a good go and can't put it down. It's pretty damn nice. It'll run Windows Phone 8... LTE...

I love the design. It's just fun, and super fast! MS has really got some awesome hardware acceleration. Android is just a piece of crap. So slow and laggy. The pinch to zoom action and screen transitions are buttery smooth. They're iOS caliber. My hats are off to MS. If a few more really awesome handsets can come out, WP has a chance.

Oh, and, by the way, don't listen to dorks like Topolsky at the Verge. The screen, despite the spec being a much lower resolution than the iPhone Retina Display... it absolutely rocks. Everything is clear and crisp and the color saturation is sick. And in direct sunlight it kills on Apple's IPS screens.

Nokia's got something here. I can't wait for this to evolve. Finally, an alternative to iOS. I still love my iPad and iPod Touch, but I need something else in my life too. This might be it.

Great hardware does not make a successful platform. It certainly helps, and while I like the *concept* behind the WP platform better than that of Android (virtually *no* concept there), it has a lot of growing to do before I'd consider it over Android (and, I even agree with you about Android's shortcomings).

Appealing hardware will get WP into peoples hands; a complete OS experience (including the same apps that their iOS and Android friends have) is needed to keep it in their hands.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

Android is succeeding for one reason only: Google gives it away free. Even if MS does this (Can't see it), Android has too much headstart, too many apps and established devs (and of course its still a long, long way behind iOS in that department).

Windows for the PC WAS a license to print money, its still doing ok but its in decline now. Unless they do something genuinely amazing, Office and Exchange is going to be the future of MS. Maybe Xbox as well. There is only one tech company with a license to print money these days.

Nowadays consumers see Windows as synonymous with viruses and malware and we all know how important consumers are when it comes to selling phones. I don't see that helping them move units. Then of course there is the very real chance that if they haven't gained 5%-10% market share by this time next year they will give up on it and start over again. Or just give up on it and concentrate on Office and Xbox.

As an aside, if the rumours about the next gen console specs are anywhere near accurate, iOS hardware is likely to eclipse them before the next hardware upgrades and if that happens then Xbox and Playstation are in some jeopardy. Carry your console (and/or controller) in your pocket and stream games to any AppleTV? Yes please.

As for hardware, I certainly like the look of the Lumia. Probably because it looks like an iPod Mini/2nd gen Nano in the way its built from an anodised aluminium tube. Is it just me or have pics of the Lumia been circulating for a very long time already? Why has it taken so long to get to market? I'm sure I saw images almost a year ago, maybe even longer.

Welll... Windows has been on the rise actually. It's got about 86% of the OS market. As for Google giving it away free... I'm sure that's a part of Android's success. The other I think is that it's so similar to iOS which everyone knows that it's a comfort zone. Couple that with the Google name behind it and bam, people buy it. Of note is that Android declined in market share worldwide overall in 4 q 2011. With the iPhone 5 lurking as well as the Lumia 900 on the market, with Windows 8 around the corner, expect more declines in Android market share.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Great hardware does not make a successful platform. It certainly helps, and while I like the *concept* behind the WP platform better than that of Android (virtually *no* concept there), it has a lot of growing to do before I'd consider it over Android (and, I even agree with you about Android's shortcomings).

Appealing hardware will get WP into peoples hands; a complete OS experience (including the same apps that their iOS and Android friends have) is needed to keep it in their hands.

My praise of the Lumia is precisely because of the complete OS experience. WP7 is excellent in many respects. It rips through Websites and screen transitions like a chainsaw. It's the first mobile OS outside iOS that is fast. The rest all suck.

And enough about the App complaints. WP has over 60,000 Apps and growing daily. It's App growth rate over the past year has exceeded the growth rate of Android on its first run to 100,000.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Welll... Windows has been on the rise actually. It's got about 86% of the OS market. As for Google giving it away free... I'm sure that's a part of Android's success. The other I think is that it's so similar to iOS which everyone knows that it's a comfort zone. Couple that with the Google name behind it and bam, people buy it.

None of the Android phones apart from the Nexus have Google's name associated with them.

In fact, almost no Android-based phones are even marketed using the term "Android" any more.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

None of the Android phones apart from the Nexus have Google's name associated with them.

In fact, almost no Android-based phones are even marketed using the term "Android" any more.

Agreed. Many handset manufacturers skin their Android handsets (one of the reasons updates take so long and many Android phones suffer from performance problems and increases fragmentation), so Android is more like a feature rather than a brand.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Welll... Windows has been on the rise actually. It's got about 86% of the OS market.

86% I'll believe, on the rise I won't without proof. Sales up maybe, market share I don't think so. Only Apple has seen growth in computer sales so how can Windows have gained market share when PC sales have slowed and Mac sales have increased?

Originally Posted by freudling 

As for Google giving it away free... I'm sure that's a part of Android's success.

Its the biggest part. Nothing appeals to companies run by accountants more than getting something for nothing. If Android cost the same as WP7, iOS would probably have 75%+ marketshare by now.

Originally Posted by freudling 

The other I think is that it's so similar to iOS which everyone knows that it's a comfort zone. Couple that with the Google name behind it and bam, people buy it. Of note is that Android declined in market share worldwide overall in 4 q 2011. With the iPhone 5 lurking as well as the Lumia 900 on the market, with Windows 8 around the corner, expect more declines in Android market share.

I don't think the average Android user knows or cares it has anything to do with Google. The carriers push it because its free and they also know people will want to change it frequently (because it isnt very good) which suits them. If Android declined in 2011 it wasn't by much. They were gaining ground until the 4S came out. Windows Phone is going to have to crawl along gaining market share if it ever gains much at all. The only thing I think they can do to help it gain traction is to try to leverage Xbox/live somehow. Maybe the phone works as a kinect controller and automatically logs you in to your live profile even on a friends Xbox, something like that.

[turtle777]

Man, all this geek talk. Most consumers won't give a shit. There are no apps, therefore, the thing won't fly. Period.

Nokia/Microsoft will need to work hard to convince 3rd party programmers to deliver apps. If this doesn't happen, WP7 is DOA.

-t

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

Its the biggest part. Nothing appeals to companies run by accountants more than getting something for nothing. If Android cost the same as WP7, iOS would probably have 75%+ marketshare by now.

Actually, that's not quite true: smartphone manufacturers need to pay licensing fees to other companies, MS being on top of that list. It is rumored these may amount to ~$5 per handset. Some extrapolation shows that MS makes more money on Android than they do with the sale of WP7.

[turtle777]

The 13% drop of Nokia stock today shows that investors are losing confidence.

-t

[amazing]

"Microsoft’s Nokia Lumia 900 flaw drops data connections, hurts U.S. turnaround bid"

Microsoft’s Nokia Lumia 900 flaw drops data connections, hurts U.S. turnaround bid – MacDailyNews - Welcome Home

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by freudling 

And enough about the App complaints. WP has over 60,000 Apps and growing daily. It's App growth rate over the past year has exceeded the growth rate of Android on its first run to 100,000.

I like how you want to dismiss WPs biggest weakness. 60,000 apps? Android is currently at 450,000 and iOS has 580,000. Where WP is relative to Androids first run is irrelevant ... the bar has been raised.

The whole point of having a smartphone is using apps. Even more important is being able to use the same social apps that your friends are using. Most customers aren't going to want to wait for WP apps to catch up with iOS or Android releases.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

None of the Android phones apart from the Nexus have Google's name associated with them.

In fact, almost no Android-based phones are even marketed using the term "Android" any more.

Google is the maker of Android.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

86% I'll believe, on the rise I won't without proof. Sales up maybe, market share I don't think so. Only Apple has seen growth in computer sales so how can Windows have gained market share when PC sales have slowed and Mac sales have increased?

Do you actually know how to use Google? Windows is on the rise, full stop.

Market share for browsers, operating systems and search engines | News

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

I don't think the average Android user knows or cares it has anything to do with Google... blah blah

Google is a very visible, global brand that has some of the most brand recognition out of any other business in the world. Saying that people don't associate Android with Google is naive and foolish. Some branding recognition info:

Google beats Microsoft, Coke in brand stakes - CNET News

[freudling]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Man, all this geek talk. Most consumers won't give a shit. There are no apps, therefore, the thing won't fly. Period.

Nokia/Microsoft will need to work hard to convince 3rd party programmers to deliver apps. If this doesn't happen, WP7 is DOA.

-t

There are 60,000 Apps. Windows reached this mark almost in the same amount of time it took Apple to reach that mark. Saying that there are no Apps is false. There are many Apps.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

The 13% drop of Nokia stock today shows that investors are losing confidence.

-t

Investors lost confidence in Nokia over a year ago. Nothing new.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

I like how you want to dismiss WPs biggest weakness. 60,000 apps? Android is currently at 450,000 and iOS has 580,000. Where WP is relative to Androids first run is irrelevant ... the bar has been raised.

The whole point of having a smartphone is using apps. Even more important is being able to use the same social apps that your friends are using. Most customers aren't going to want to wait for WP apps to catch up with iOS or Android releases.

Well then if most customers won't wait for WP to have hundreds of thousands of bullshxt Apps like its competitors... if they don't play the same dumb marketing game... then why did people buy into Android when it was starting out against iOS?

This whole number of Apps is BS. Research shows that some 75% of all Apps downloaded are used for an average of 5 minutes and never used again. More noise. More crap. Quality, not quantity. I'm happy with my Nokia 900. I'm probably the only one in this thread who has actually used one for real. Not pretend internet talk...

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Well then if most customers won't wait for WP to have hundreds of thousands of bullshxt Apps like its competitors

It doesn't need to be hundreds of thousands of apps ... it just needs to be the *right* apps. Instagram, for example, would need to be on Windows Phone before many of my friends would consider the platform.

Originally Posted by freudling 

... if they don't play the same dumb marketing game... then why did people buy into Android when it was starting out against iOS?

The more influential app players hadn't emerged yet at that point.

Originally Posted by freudling 

This whole number of Apps is BS. Research shows that some 75% of all Apps downloaded are used for an average of 5 minutes and never used again. More noise. More crap. Quality, not quantity. I'm happy with my Nokia 900. I'm probably the only one in this thread who has actually used one for real. Not pretend internet talk...

You're right, it isn't really about numbers. But, if all of my friends have baseball gloves, I'm not going to buy ice skates.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Google is the maker of Android.

So?

ARM licenses the processor technology. Doesn't mean anybody knows or cares, or associates the brand.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

So?

ARM licenses the processor technology. Doesn't mean anybody knows or cares, or associates the brand.

Show me the data that supports the claim that nobody knows or cares that Android is associated with Google.

[freudling]

He's batting 60%, I'm at 79% in terms of number of Apps from my old system that I used frequently that are available on WP.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/4/9/293...es-the-problem

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Show me the data that supports the claim that nobody knows or cares that Android is associated with Google.

Show me the data that people are buying Android phones because of the Google brand.

That was YOUR initial claim, and I merely pointed out that Google is NOWHERE associated with any phones beyond the Nexus, AT ALL, and that, in fact, nobody even advertises "Android" anymore.

Show me the advertising and marketing material that associates phones with Google.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Show me the data that people are buying Android phones because of the Google brand.

That was YOUR initial claim, and I merely pointed out that Google is NOWHERE associated with any phones beyond the Nexus, AT ALL, and that, in fact, nobody even advertises "Android" anymore.

Show me the advertising and marketing material that associates phones with Google.

With brand awareness stronger than Coke, you can't believe what you're writing.

Oh my! "Google Android" mentioned in a Reuters article:

Rogers to offer companies alternative to BlackBerry | Canada | Reuters

Oh look! People referring to Android phones as Google phones!

According to one website we found, Google is not actually the Android creator. Yes, today Google gets all the credit for these phones. In fact many people simply call them “Google phones” when they are checking them out. From what we learned...

What Do You Know About the Android OS? | fountainoflifecolleges.com

And then there's the Google branded Android App Store, references to Google within the handsets themselves, etc. Google is to Android as Microsoft is to Windows.

And nobody is advertising Android anymore?

http://www.rogers.com/web/content/android_takeover

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by freudling 

With brand awareness stronger than Coke, you can't believe what you're writing.

Brand awareness is irrelevant if it's not linked to a product.

Coca-Cola's brand awareness numbers are completely worthless to the "Georgia" lemonade line, as they're not marketed as Coke derivatives. Never heard of "Georgia"?

How can that be, with brand awareness almost as huge as Google?

Originally Posted by freudling 

And nobody is advertising Android anymore?

http://www.rogers.com/web/content/android_takeover

Challenge: Find a reference to "Google" in that Flash site.

Challenge: Find that "Android Takeover" page from Rogers' homepage. I couldn't.

Challenge: Find a reference to "Android" on this page:
http://www.rogers.com/web/link/wirel...uctType=normal
(from the Rogers homepage, I clicked on "wireless" and then on "phones".)

The only direct reference to "Android" I could find was—on the Galaxy Nexus.

Hell, even if you click directly on the Samsung Galaxy S II LTE, there is NO REFERENCE TO ANDROID except for a single badge buried in the "Features" tab (and, of course, the user reviews).

If it were relevant, you'd think they'd at least point it out in the "Overview" blurb on one of the flagship phones, no?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Oh look! People referring to Android phones as Google phones!

According to one website we found, Google is not actually the Android creator. Yes, today Google gets all the credit for these phones. In fact many people simply call them “Google phones” when they are checking them out. From what we learned...

What Do You Know About the Android OS? | fountainoflifecolleges.com

Well, if fountainoflifecolleges says so ...

(by the way: "data" does not mean finding 1 or 2 barely-there websites that share your point of view)

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by freudling 

He's batting 60%, I'm at 79% in terms of number of Apps from my old system that I used frequently that are available on WP.

The Lumia 900 is indeed my next, but here's the problem | The Verge Forums

Yes, and he said "it hurts".
Also, when he ranked the apps that were important to *him*, only 35% were available on Windows Phone. And, he also notes that the WP versions of some apps are terrible when compared with their Android versions (he specifically mentions Twitter).

... I'm wondering if you even read this post, beyond seeing only the 60% number that you were looking for.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Actually, that's not quite true:

Thats per handset. A maker has to pay M$ 3 times as much for WP7 as they do for Android. It may not be free but its significantly cheaper.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Do you actually know how to use Google? Windows is on the rise, full stop.

Market share for browsers, operating systems and search engines | News

Its gone up slightly for two quarters at the end of the financial year when everyone is spending the rest of their budgets. "On the rise" remains to be seen.

Originally Posted by freudling 

Google is a very visible, global brand that has some of the most brand recognition out of any other business in the world. Saying that people don't associate Android with Google is naive and foolish.

Google is a very well-known brand, yes but Android phones are not plastered in Google logos and even if the OS was people just assume its a google toolbar like they have in IE or Firefox on their PC. I deal with end users trying to connect their devices up to email accounts and services on a daily basis, its what I do. Most of them don't even know what an OS is let alone what Android is let alone that it has anything to do with Google. Many of them don't even know what model of phone they have when I ask them, so please don't call me naive and foolish for stating something that I know is right and you only believe to be wrong based on the fact that you know Google made Android.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by freudling 

why did people buy into Android when it was starting out against iOS?

Because the carriers were scared that Apple was going to take over the whole market and make them their bitches.

[imitchellg5]

I played with a Lumia 900 yesterday and I really wanted to love the whole experience, but I couldn't. I think that hardware design is brilliant. It's definitely one of the best on the market right now, if not the best. The only aspect of the design that I don't like are the cheap silver hardware buttons that seem to clash with the rest of the phone.

There are two major things though that I don't like about the Lumia 900, and Windows Phone 7 in general. The first is that the hardware limitation of a 800x480 screen is just too-low resolution these days, especially at 4.3". I have a 4" phone with qHD resolution, and I'm not about to go lower resolution at a higher screen size. The second is that Windows Phone 7 STILL has pretty much the same bugs now as it did when I had a HTC HD7 two years ago. IE still has issues with HTML5 heavy sites, still can't get fonts right, and a few other things. There are still hardly any apps at all worth using, and, one of what was supposed to be the biggest selling point of Windows Phone 7, Xbox gaming, has nothing. There are hardly even any major titles for the platform.

I really enjoyed using Windows Phone 7 when it first came out two years ago. It was lacking some major features, but I was willing to overlook those because of the promise and innovation that Microsoft had shown. I'm just getting frustrated that two years later, it still can, at times, feel like a beta product that isn't ready for primetime. Over the past two years, Android and iOS have grown considerably more refined. Android has been completely redesigned from the ground up with Ice Cream Sandwich, and it feels like a very, very mature product now. iOS has become incredibly refined, though in my opinion the design is dated. It reminds me of the Porsche 911 the year before it gets redesigned: it's as good as it gets, but you're ready for some change. I guess I had hoped that maybe Windows Phone 7 could be that change, since iOS really hasn't really had a redesign since 2007. I'm still waiting though for Windows Phone 7 to actually be good enough to use every day. Until then, I'm sticking with Ice Cream Sandwich.