Windows Phone 7.5 update lowers system requirements | Hacker News Reader

Windows Phone 7.5 update lowers system requirements

osnews.com

34 pointsale55andro14 comments

The understanding of how a B2B relationship works is probably why Nokia went with Windows Phone - Microsoft is able and willing to tailor their software to Nokia's business model, and Nokia's business model fits with Microsoft's vision of the phone as a widespread computing device (see TouchDevelop) via the next generation of "feature phones" affordable to very large numbers of people in the developing world.

Looking at what was cut, these are the kind of features Google cannot afford to drop - services which require connection to Microsoft's servers in order to work and where latency issues and the degree of internet business presence in the much of the developing world could significantly degrade performance. For Apple, their ambition in these markets appears to be somewhat limited in scope.

I agree, this was a great move for Microsoft. Their biggest problem right now is visibility. If this move puts their OS onto more phones and into more hands (especially if they are cheaper phones that more people can afford) it is a net win.

The OS works great on high-end phones, so it won't be a problem when those "feature phone" users start to upgrade.

Essentially, they have taken up the strategy that Google had back in Oct 2008. There were a lot of early comments from Schmidt, etc that indicated the Android plan was to compete on the low end of the hardware spectrum.

It sounds good, but I really question how much room there really is down there with the data plan requirements that typically come along with using any kind of smartphone.

Do people really want to pay $100 for a stripped down device when $200 will frequently buy them a full-featured smartphone (with similar data plan prices)?

I think this is a US problem. I paid full price for my phone (500€) and have a 6€ dataplan per month, which includes 300 Mb - after that it's 56 kb/s. This is great for most people that just want to do read some news, check facebook and download an app or two. I can pay 10 € for 1 Gb. A phone at 200€ + 6 € per month is something I could get my parents.

These so-called low end phones will have twice the specs of the iphone 1. I'm pretty sure they can get good performance out of hardware like that.

Yes, that is the problem they are going to run into, IMO. A similar price-point will buy them an Android phone with quite a bit more power than an early iPhone, and a much more mature application ecosystem. So why bother with Windows?

This looks like a "kneecap Android" maneuver.

Make it so your OS performs great on cheap hardware, and then hope that that is enough of a benefit to get phone providers to push Windows Phone over Android because they can make more in margin with your inexpensive hardware.

Interesting strategy, to say the least.

It's not that much about Android and phone providers as it's about Symbian/S40/S60 and Nokia's feature phones. Hi-end smartphones is an away match for Nokia so they're bringing the game to their home turf. Apple is not interested in this market (at least for now, iPhone Nano rumors appear every two years) and Android is not designed for phones that cheap (I know because I got one: Galaxy Ace). The strategy seems logical: push WinPhone into cheap hardware, build an ecosystem, grow a brand awareness among the users and make some solid money in the process (thanks to a high volume).

If they'll execute this right people, while upgrading their phones in a year or so, will be more likely to choose familiar looking Windows Phone 8 smartphone over "strange" Android or iOS. The only problem is: Nokia didn't manage to do so with Symbian and can't afford another failure.

BTW, if I were Ballmer I would push for a tablet designed for this part of market as well. A Kindle Fire but without Android flaws and hiccups. Nokia could make one that'd be strongly integrated with their phones - for example: a tablet without camera but flawlessly cooperating with all the Lumias, 808 PureView and so on.

Actually, they didn't really lower requirements in the sense that the OS requires less horsepower. They simply removed some networking features and blacklisted apps that use too many resources. In my view that stretches the notion of lower system requirements. :/

They actually lowered the requirements: the minimum memory is now 256 MB instead of 512 MB and 7x27 processors are supported.

Not necessarily pertinent to the discussion, however in the linked article-

"Well, technically it doesn't amaze me at all, because Windows Mobile PocketPC SP2 CE Embedded Compact Ultimate already ran very fast on PDAs ten years ago, but still. "

Fast or fluid is not a word anyone would ever use to describe Windows Mobile / CE. I lived with those devices from the iPaq through the Moto Q, and it was always an absolutely miserable experience (worse than Android in the G1 release days, which is pretty bad). This has little bearing on the current generation of devices, but that incredible claim just could not go unmet.

EDIT: There is no "sarcasm" there beyond a play on a product name. If the poster doesn't really mean what they explicitly said, they convey it extremely poorly.

Looking at the name of the OS, I think there is clear sarcasm in that quote.

While the product name is apparently intended to be humorously ammended, the observation itself does not appear to be sarcasm. The poster appears to be legitimately claiming that Windows Mobile is an efficient platform.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com