Sorry for the snark - I like WP7, I think it's a refreshing take on smartphone UI, but adoption is really at a standstill. It's been how long since it launched and I've only ever seen one in the wild that didn't belong to someone affiliated with MSFT.
God knows I'd love to have a viable third player in the mobile platform wars, but as it is it just isn't happening.
Not a fair comparison:
WP7 was launched in October 21, 2010[1] [2]
Android was launched 2 years earlier [3]
iOS more than 3 years earlier[4]
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Phone [2]Assuming that you're talking about WP7 and not Windows Mobile [3]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28software%29#Hardware [4]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_%28Apple%29#History
edit: Please explain why I'm wrong before downvoting.
With WP7 there doesn't seem to be the enthusiasm for the product. It's a terrific OS but I get the feeling that they're really late to the game. This could all change but I don't think anyone is willing to bet their money or time on it, especially after the swift demise of WebOS.
And Microsoft's indecisive churn on its development stack lately has got to make developers a little wary.
If I ran a phone maker, I'd keep a WP7 handset or two in the lineup (because there will be people who'll want it) and because I don't like to be cornered. But I'd also keep a team ready to run with Android without Google support, knowing exactly what I'd have to change if I couldn't use Google brands or software.
But, again, you don't have to depend on Google like you do with Microsoft. And true great devices come from the careful matching of hardware and software and that's hard to do if you don't get the source code.
In any case, I don't see why you think OEMs are particularly dependent on Google. Google has no direct control over Android -- it's just that Google's fork of the Android source code is the most popular with OEMs for the time being. There is nothing stopping OEMs from building their own CyanogenMod-type customizations (after all, Samsung just hired the creator of this ROM) or even forking Android entirely as apparently some Chinese OEMs are doing: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2010/07/androids-ascent-.... Hell, there's nothing stopping Microsoft OEMs from releasing their own customization of Android with deep integration with XBox Live, Bing search, and Microsoft's other cloud services.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/08/16/asay_on_goole_patent...
There are some cold realities that Microsoft is up against here. A half decent "me too" effort that's 4 years late is not going to win a lot of marketshare.
WP7, so far, is a failure.
MS have proven themselves to be very poor at updating Windows Phone. They simply aren't light enough on their feet.
Their battle ship did not help the Zune.
And their ideas on tablet interfaces are STILL centred around matching desktop power and features.... They were arrogant and dismissive towards the iPad, and Windows on tablets will definitely be a bloodied nose for them if they believe they can drop in desktop applications onto curated experiences like tablets.
The only chance I can see, is if they position themselves as a simpler alternative to Android.
Which is damn hard to do because Android is open-source and you don't want to even talk to Google unless you want to put Google-branded software on your thingie. It's hardly noticeable, but Android powers all Nook devices, including the first dual-screen one.
Microsoft is a battleship. It moves incredibly slowly, but once it turns, and sets its guns on something it brings an immense amount of firepower to bear.
Years ago, people complained about Microsoft's take on security. Win 7 is now one of the most secure OS's on the market. People a couple years ago were complaining about how ugly Windows was... Win 7 mobile is gorgeous, and previews show that Metro is going to be prominent in Win 8. I'd bet that Windows is going to be a force to be reckoned with in mobile, but it's going to take a couple of years.
Yep, that's why it took two weeks for my wife's machine to be compromised with malware, and it was back to Ubuntu for her. Windows 7 is definitely an improvement, but for the two years she's run Ubuntu, there have been absolutely no malware issues. Now, if all the damned video codecs worked appropriately...
Microsoft is the underdog here but they have a much better chance of making something happen.
HP bought the DNA they needed and Apotheker threw it out.
The true tragedy of HP had occurred well before Apotheker.
Maybe all that they have left is the business sector but they will be far less successful than IBM.
This is the kind of discussion that seems interesting on the surface but in reality has little substance, but here's your one example: QDOS->MSDOS.
...and here we go down the rabbit hole. If I answer your question, which expands the scope of discussion beyond what the GP post was requesting and beyond the scope of my comment, then you respond, and I respond again, by the end of the thread we could be discussing the relative merits of tuna versus salmon.
I was responding with a specific counterexample to a specific point (which I quoted) raised in the original post. Nothing more.
Or, if you prefer a one-word answer: "yes." Now, I'm going to leave this thread to its proper place in my mind, which is to say, out of it :).
Nokia's success depends far more on the strength of WP7 than does WP7's success rely upon the strength of Nokia.
Given the pseudo-acquisition of Nokia, MSFT has a golden opportunity here to create an end-to-end appliance the way Apple does; to make sure that they're selling a sexy package, instead of selling a sexy OS in blah hardware (i.e., all of the WP7 launch phones) or a blah OS in sexy hardware.
They can finally do the vertical integration that IMHO is sorely needed if anyone hopes to compete at Apple's level.
Buuuuut given MSFT's track record in recent years, and with the departure of some key heads (who pushed for vertically integrated "experience"-building, instead of OEM licensing), I'm not banking on it happening this way.
I hear it's different in the USA, but here in Australia many people would LOVE to buy a Nokia, their brand name is associated with 'quality'. If Nokia can hit the right price points, I can see users who have been disappointed with their budget Android devices heading to the 'safe haven' of a Nokia device.
It will take a while to gain momentum, but I'm optimistic on the outcome. I hope they go well because I'd love to develop for WP7.
Shortly thereafter, I bought a Nexus One.
The HTC Dream was an odd little device, but it still holds a special place in my heart (I ended up buying one dirt cheap to hack on, so I could use my N1 for daily use)
I wouldn't just point to Android's immaturity. The G1 is just not a great design. Perhaps, if Dalvik could make use of the Jazelle extensions or the presentation layer made use of the GPU, the G1 would present a better experience, but, overall, I wouldn't expect it to fly.
Microsoft might still be a contender in this game -- they spent some $5B and managed to attain that position in gaming despite a very late start (compared to Sony and Nintendo). Though you should remember Sony were resting on their PS2 laurels, and Nintendo were licking their wounds at the time. Both Apple and Google are still with a cut-throat we-have-to-win-this attitude, and they are strong opponents.
I don't really care how many tip calculators or games there are. If you don't have the biggies, it's hardly more than mail+SMS, at least for me.
I did have the Zune Pass, though, which is a nice alternative to all of the music apps. But, it doesn't work on OSX (can't stream under silverlight; the windows phone connector can't browse/copy media), so it meant booting up my gaming machine any time I wanted to put more music on it.
It's worse than that for WP7. Even Samsung's Bada has more marketshare than Microsoft. That puts Microsoft in fifth place, and without even any momentum.