Ballmer Chides Microsoft Over Cloud Revenue Disclosures
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
That plus the small market share (~1-2%) makes it look pretty bleak (which is sad, I would have preferred more competition between mobile operating systems, e.g. with Firefox OS and Windows in the mix too).
Microsoft's new Lumia models are all basically "last year's $120 model, now for $100". Which is fine if you're in the precise market for a $100 phone, but then you also have lots of options from cheapo Android vendors... Windows Phone has long enjoyed a performance advantage on the low end, but that gap is closing. Meanwhile even the low-end market has come to demand a full range of 3rd party software, so Windows is losing there too.
For high-end consumers, Microsoft doesn't have anything. The Lumia 950 is barely ok, but won't stop the bleeding.
My last Lumia was a 1520 which I bought two years ago. It's nearly equivalent to the brand new 950XL -- and my old phone has a nicer design. (How did Microsoft mess that up? Don't they understand that when their fans have waited two years for a flagship phone, it needs to look attractive?)
So I'm probably not getting another Windows phone ever again. The effort of returning to the platform would be too great at this point. (I had three different WP7/8 phones over the years, so I was fairly committed to it.)
It was one of the nicer aspects, not having to worry about backing up and moving around phone cam photos and videos. Gone, poof, and not a peep from anyone at Microsoft about the protests: https://onedrive.uservoice.com/forums/262982-onedrive/sugges...
I suppose this does wonders for hardware sales. Just not the right kind.
Life is long and product cycles are short. Growing up, I'd never have imagined I'd be using a Mac now.
If only they leveraged this to gain a material lead in battery life - or physical device sexiness - or both.
They definitely need a new head designer/artist. Same problem with the Surface series. Excellent engineering but not beautiful. I've never had an emotional response to the aesthetic of a Microsoft phone or tablet.
To put it in your words, I had a strong emotional response to the design of the Surface Book and its unique hinge. It's not more of the same and it looks great.
Many of us fans of Windows Phone have picked up Lumia 950s because they are what is available today, but they were not designed by Panos Panay's Surface team. We are clamoring for an upcoming rumored "Surface Phone" that may have the Surface design motif which so many of us prefer. So the 950 feels like a stop-gap that was released to satiate fans as Panay's team cooks up something more interesting.
As a Windows Mobile user, I'd run Android apps if they were available, of course. But I don't really care if they're not. I have the apps I use (phone, messaging, maps, e-mail, browser, Twitter, news, calendar, Netflix, Kindle, photos, stocks, weather, music, podcasts) and one I'm starting to really enjoy: Continuum. So sure, running Android apps might allow me to enjoy the latest food delivery or clothing sharing service from Silicon Valley, but... meh. I'll pass.
That's a self-selecting group :) , so definitely not representative. I like the Surface, but it would be better to get people who don't own either a Surface or an Apple product to rate them.
I think Windows Phone is brilliant. Well-made devices and a great operating system, but the lack of apps makes it very unattractive to the general masses. Support for Android apps without needing to be redeveloped is a no-brainer in my opinion. No developer will see the value in converting an Android app over to Windows. It has to support Android apps out-of-the-box without the developer needing to do anything or no tool, no matter how great or smart it is will make developers change their tune, even if it is easy to do so.
At present there is no motivation for developers to develop for Windows Phone and no incentive for customers who adopt the platform. This is very much a chicken and egg problem, one I don't think they will ever solve for as long as they don't support Android apps.
Have you looked at the Android Play Store lately? Its Facebook, Netflix, Twitter, the McDonalds app (#16 !?!?!) a few other social things, games ... and the rest is total crap.
Why take this ocean of garbage onto a new platform (and at the same time, alienate existing developers who now must compete with Android apps)?
If app popularity obeys power laws (0.005% of all apps make 60% of all app store revenue)[1], seems a better strategy is just to make sure you have the few essential apps necessary, and then provide great tools and encourage developers to write the rest.
> At present there is no motivation for developers to develop for Windows Phone
I've been developing for Android quite some time, and the economics of the platform are not appealing. There have been several articles saying the cost of Android app dev is between 20-30% (minimum) more expensive than iOS[2].
As Windows 10 adoption moves along, it will be more enticing to write a univeral app for that platform and mobile.
[1] http://arc.applause.com/2015/11/11/app-discovery-strategy-an... [2] https://adtmag.com/articles/2015/11/02/android-ios-costs.asp...
Do you actually have an Android phone? Because this is totally not true at all. Like for example I just installed the imgur app and it's fantastic. I have 1password and it's great. Hearthstone? Yup, amazing. Just like every app I have I'm happy with. I just don't think you have any idea what you're talking about. I know an Android engineer who works for Square and they've got a huge Android team that is doing amazing work.
Exactly. It takes a huge Android team to do the simplest things. Twitter app has dozens of engineers. It doesn't do much!
Local food delivery? Only Android or iOS. Local bus routes? Android or iOS. And so on.
And lemevi has a point, there are some cool games amidst that sea of crap which are simply not available on WP.
I've said before that WP has been doing a great work in their low-end phones (though they've gotten stale lately), but they're still losing the battle.
If that works, it makes more sense to me than emulating or porting android apps. Those ideas will never work, as MS probably found out with the canceled Astoria project. It's a great sounding strategy, but that kind of technology isn't practical for many reasons. Just look at all of the issues that wine has trying to go the opposite direction on Linux.
On Windows desktops in Metro, though. That's a little bit different of a value proposition when WPF and other toolkits do still exist outside of it.
But the problem is, for most mobile apps it doesn't make any sense to 'run on a desktop'. So MS huge desktop marketshare doesn't cancel out their tiny mobile marketshare.
Then you have the problem that universal apps have to be sold through the app store which has all the problems of the Mac app store except worse in every respect.
Universal Apps : Native :: Responsive Design : Web
Universal Apps work the same way, they adapt to screen size. And with the nearly continuous spectrum of screen sizes from phones to phablets to small tablets to large tablets to small desktop displays to large desktop displays, there's a great upside to using such an approach.
Have you seen how the new Outlook app adapts to the a full-size display using Continuum? It's pretty awesome.
Frankly, I'm not really sure why you wouldn't use that approach.
That said, I agree the app store model needs to be reconsidered by everyone.
They would need to want their apps on Windows 10 desktops. Which excludes for example nearly every corporate desktop now and probably most of them for many years to come.
"Better Windows Than Windows" was one of the nails in OS/2's coffin, a lesson MS should be rather familiar with.
Microsoft has traditionally been invincible in the enterprise, but none of their cool new toys work with the Windows versions actually used there.
There's a native Youtube WP app I believe, and decent maps apps as well. Youtube works well in browser too.
Ballmers prefers Windows phones that run Android Apps.
I wonder which is a better strategy.
Satya's strategy encourages platform lock-in (which is good for Microsoft), but at this point Microsoft needs to encourage consumers to buy the thing to make it worth developing for; even if it's just a different front-end.
Ballmers strategy trades the lock-in for something that solves the chicken and egg problem and removes a huge advantage that android has over windows phone.
I'm assuming that's some kind of auto-correct fail and you meant "Satya"..
1. Many Android apps depend on proprietary Google Play Services. So app customization is needed anyway.
2. Do ordinary people really need unified apps for PCs and mobile?
Currently an easiest way to develop multi platform apps is to create a native mobile app and UI for power users in web browser. There is no need to build a running tracking app as a desktop native app.
Recently notification center was removed from Chrome. To my surprise it turned out that nobody was using it. Well, I also wasn't using it because my (Android|iPhone) is always with me.
I seem to recall he said something similar about the iPhone
But then a year later AT&T started subsidizing the iPhone 3G in exchange for a two year contract, and that's when sales really took off. You can clearly see the uptick in July 2008 when that happened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_operating_system#/media...
That is what changed the mobile phone industry. It created a whole new market: the consumer smartphone market. Previously it was only really affordable for two markets: enterprise buyers and rich people. With this new model, everyone could afford a smartphone. Now I don't have any proof of this, but my hunch is Jobs convinced AT&T to go with this business model. If true, his true genius when it came to the iPhone was not really in making a really nice device, but in creating a whole new market for it.
The iPhone sold more in 2008 Q4 than in the previous 5 quarters combined, which I suspect is when the AT&T subsidization started.
Also it's worth noting the iPhone didn't initially have an app store or support 3rd party apps, which is what Ballmer was referring to. Had that held, history likely would have proven him right.
I remember being envious of the iPhone for just that reason and as soon as other operators offered competing data deals I stumped up the cash for a smartphone.
"Ballmer, who is the company’s biggest individual shareholder"