Google engineer on WP7: The world doesn't need another platform

In an interview with PCMag (via Engadget), Google engineer Andy Rubin discussed Android, market fragmentation, and even Windows Phone 7. In what was probably a spur of the moment statement, Rubin stated that he thinks that the world doesn't need yet another mobile phone platform. The way Rubin sees it, the only reason someone would even try to create a new platform is for political reasons. Maybe he has a point. More OS's mean more fragmentation in the market, more phones that developers have to choose between, more chances of incompatibilities, etc. Many of us clearly remember the pre-Windows world of desktop computing and the annoyance that came with finding out that you can't get the software you want on your machine.

When Android was first announced, Apple's iOS was taking the world by storm, Blackberry was getting into the ‘touch' scene, Symbian was doing OK, and Microsoft had a small share too. At that stage no one knew they needed Android, and there were already plenty of OS options. Since that time, the market has become even more complex with Samsung throwing in a new in-house OS (Bada), and soon Microsoft's going to be launching their Windows Phone 7 platform - but it's still Windows Phone. Microsoft's replacing the old Windows Phone with a new (very different) version, they're not a new player with a new brand. Claiming that the world doesn't need another phone OS seems a little strange to me when you work for a company that made a completely new OS, and you're trying to brush-off a competitor that's heavily revising their OS.

On the topic of fragmentation, Rubin shared the views of most consumers and claims to want OEMs to use the latest Android versions instead of out-dated builds. Of course, Google's long-time competitor Microsoft would be able to tell them a few stories about OEMs not giving up on old software versions. In fact, Windows XP might be the case study that Google needs to learn from. The biggest reason for XP's prolonged (zombie-like) existence isn't because people don't like change, and it's not because people don't want to upgrade their hardware. It's because so many companies put so much time and effort into building applications for XP - and it takes a long time for those companies to decide that it's worth the money to rewrite huge amounts of code. Android, which has gone through a number of version changes since birth, may be suffering from a similar fate. Perhaps Google's way out of the fragmentation mess is to change is to give developers more of heads-up, that way they'll be able to code with future changes in mind and not be stuck with a customization that only works on one build.

What do you think about Andy Rubin's comments? Is Windows Phone 7 going to add that much more confusion into the mobile marketplace, or is it already so full of competition that it won't matter?

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Zune to go international soon

Next Story

Watch the NFL on TV when you're at the game

97 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I just want to point out in the comments that heaps of people are saying WP7 is not a continuation of Windows Mobile but then why does it have the number 7 after it? The last Windows Mobile number was 6 (or 6.5 or whatever, not keeping up) so WP7 obviously follows with just a small name change. Anyway can't wait for my new WP7 phone

Android doesn't have fragmentation issues, the average life span of a phone ensures this to be true. The problem with windows mobile is that's its too late to the game and its not an open platform. It will lose.

nubs said,
Android doesn't have fragmentation issues, the average life span of a phone ensures this to be true. The problem with windows mobile is that's its too late to the game and its not an open platform. It will lose.

Historically, open platforms confuse consumers, and a well-managed closed platform will always look more attractive.

My heart-felt congratulations to Android for being open. Wake me up when there are no more market apps with warnings to uninstall before updating to avoid breaking software.

I currently use an Android phone, and the only reason I'm remotely interested in WP7 is because of the Zune music player integration. Nearly all of my music is from the Zune music software, and I won't want to buy all of those songs just so I can listen to it on my phone.

Epic fail! there is no such thing as too many platforms, it's like saying there is no room for another brand of car! it's just a stupid thing to say. This just shows WP7 has Google running scared in my honest opinion, which is a good thing. More rivalry between the platforms is only good for us consumers, so bring it on That is my 2 cents, take with a grain of salt.

What else would he say? I'm typing this from my Galaxy S but I'm very intrigued by WP7's Xbox Live features, and I'll bet I'm not alone.

But we DO need another platform, here's why:

* iOS apps are written in Objective-C
* Blackberry apps are written in Java
* Android apps are written in Java
* WebOS apps are written in Java
* Symbian apps are written Java

Just on a business opportunity perspective, .Net is not represented in the mobile space.

WP7 caters to a need that is overlooked by the other mobile platforms.

rocjoe said,
But we DO need another platform, here's why:

* iOS apps are written in Objective-C
* Blackberry apps are written in Java
* Android apps are written in Java
* WebOS apps are written in Java
* Symbian apps are written Java

Just on a business opportunity perspective, .Net is not represented in the mobile space.

WP7 caters to a need that is overlooked by the other mobile platforms.

Exactly. And since there are hundreds (likely even thousands, I have no idea ) Windows developers, they more than likely already know C# (and Visual Basic [ewww] will be coming soon too!) there won't be much they have to learn!

Which is why Microsoft is confident there will be a flood of apps soon, since so many are already familiar with .NET

Mr aldo said,
Exactly. And since there are hundreds (likely even thousands, I have no idea ) Windows developers, they more than likely already know C# (and Visual Basic [ewww] will be coming soon too!) there won't be much they have to learn!

Which is why Microsoft is confident there will be a flood of apps soon, since so many are already familiar with .NET

It's actually hundreds of thousands... C# is a VERY popular language, and VB (Which is also able to be used to develop for WP7) is equally popular...

Electric Jolt said,

What's wrong with Visual Basic? I learned it...

Sorry, should have said that was my opinion. I just don't like the syntax.

I can kind of see his point however so far the only two directly competing platforms are iOS and Android, bb and wp7 imo can both find a really nice niche and expand on said niche quite easily. The others are fairly irrelevant and don't need to be mentioned anymore (im looking at you, symbian)

Is it more or I would have expected this comment to have come from Apple, they are the ones that usually are like this.

But Google, least it will update as said. You release 2.2 (Froyo) to about 10 devices when there are still loads of devices on 2.1 or even 1.6 .

In the end it would be like 1 or 2 OSs which will dominate.Its like when there were so many desktop OSs until Windows, and so many search engines until Google, and so many social networks until Facebook.The market is still relatively young so its ok to have strong competition and many choices.

Interesting comment. They are talking about Microsoft like they are new to the mobile game and have never done it before.

FACT: Microsoft was there first, if anyone didn't need another platform then why did you come out with Android (and it's more your fault for such a CRAPPY update system the leads to major fragmentation, i.e. you should have learned from Windows Mobile, guess not.)

Andy Rubin just made one of the most ignorant, biased, uninformed comments that I've heard to date from him.

The reason XP stuck around so long was because Microsoft took so long in getting Longhorn out the door, and then had major problems with Vista ('s perception) when it was released.

It is interesting that no one is attacking iPhone. MS has made a bigger deal about winning over Android customers. Now this is an attack on Android from MS. Is the Windows vs Linux debate about to move to a new front?

Do Microsoft guys ever say stuff like this? Last I checked, MS seems to embrace most competing platforms as a challenge to find ways to profit off of them (Office on Mac, Bing for iPhone). When dealing with the press, MS always seems to have a level head when discussing their competitors.

But dangit if Apple and Google higher-ups aren't just the whiniest little kids.

Joshie said,
Do Microsoft guys ever say stuff like this? Last I checked, MS seems to embrace most competing platforms as a challenge to find ways to profit off of them (Office on Mac, Bing for iPhone). When dealing with the press, MS always seems to have a level head when discussing their competitors.

But dangit if Apple and Google higher-ups aren't just the whiniest little kids.

Also Bing on Android - download it today.

Auditor said,
Microsoft Mobile poses threat to no one but to itself like Zune.
Zune's don't even have a phone capability.

Troll is troll.

"the only reason someone would even try to create a new platform is for political reasons." that means you created Android for political reason....Windows Mobile 6.5 was doing fine...Symbian was doing better..and iOS was the BEST....so did we really need Android then?

Faisal Islam said,
"the only reason someone would even try to create a new platform is for political reasons." that means you created Android for political reason....Windows Mobile 6.5 was doing fine...Symbian was doing better..and iOS was the BEST....so did we really need Android then?

If they only stopped at Android, how many other things have they made/tried out that redo/copy/clone something else out there?

GP007 said,

If they only stopped at Android, how many other things have they made/tried out that redo/copy/clone something else out there?

Exactly. It's their entire business model...

GP007 said,

If they only stopped at Android, how many other things have they made/tried out that redo/copy/clone something else out there?

well at least solid,original & revolutionary UI (not copied from iOS...like android does everytime..See Samsung Galaxy)...n android? give the a good list with ORIGINAL features which are not copied from iOS, Windows Mobile 6.5, BlackBerry or Symbian!

I wouldn't expect anything else from the cocky and arrogant Google clan. They won't be happy until they've achieved SkyNet.

The world doesn't need another digital set top box like Google TV. See how arrogance easily backfires?

Good company spokesmen let the market decide whether a product is good or not. Pre-emptively trashing competitors is the reason why we have so many lovely quotes from executives that make them look very dumb. It's never a wise decision to add more words to the stack that can be used against you.

dagamer34 said,
The world doesn't need another digital set top box like Google TV. See how arrogance easily backfires?

Or another Linux distro.
Or another office suite.
Or another online mail system.

With Google's products, where do you stop really? It's all they do is duplicate product lines that already exist...

The way I see it is that the world doesn't need another mobile phone OS that replicates iOS or Android, which is what makes WP7 so much different

"and soon Microsoft's going to be revising and basically relaunching the Windows Phone platform - but it is still Windows Mobile."
Revising and relaunching? "still Windows Mobile"? Wow.. you obviously have your head in a hole if you haven't seen that it's not just revised or relaunched. Windows Phone 7 is a brand new OS, and a whole new way of using a smart device. This isn't the Windows Mobile your Grandfather uses, and definitely not the iOS or Android that your Dad is so fond of.

KipReadme said,
"and soon Microsoft's going to be revising and basically relaunching the Windows Phone platform - but it is still Windows Mobile."
Revising and relaunching? "still Windows Mobile"? Wow.. you obviously have your head in a hole if you haven't seen that it's not just revised or relaunched. Windows Phone 7 is a brand new OS, and a whole new way of using a smart device. This isn't the Windows Mobile your Grandfather uses, and definitely not the iOS or Android that your Dad is so fond of.
I think you misunderstood me. The point was that Microsoft isn't entering the market, it's updating it's offering. I'll revise that line.

Brody McKee said,
I think you misunderstood me. The point was that Microsoft isn't entering the market, it's updating it's offering. I'll revise that line.

Yeah, I thought the point was quite clear...

KipReadme said,
Wow.. you obviously have your head in a hole if you haven't seen that it's not just revised or relaunched. Windows Phone 7 is a brand new OS, and a whole new way of using a smart device. This isn't the Windows Mobile your Grandfather uses, and definitely not the iOS or Android that your Dad is so fond of.

Its called Windows Phone SEVEN! Not Windows Phone 1.0 or whatever, its a continuation of the brand with a slight name change and a new OS.

KipReadme said,
"and soon Microsoft's going to be revising and basically relaunching the Windows Phone platform - but it is still Windows Mobile."
Revising and relaunching? "still Windows Mobile"? Wow.. you obviously have your head in a hole if you haven't seen that it's not just revised or relaunched. Windows Phone 7 is a brand new OS, and a whole new way of using a smart device. This isn't the Windows Mobile your Grandfather uses, and definitely not the iOS or Android that your Dad is so fond of.

It is not a new OS, it is a new UI and a new Application API set.

WP7 is very much WinCE, but instead of the classic API sets, it only offers the managed XNA and Silverlight API sets.

ZuneHD is also very much WinCE, but offers non of the classic API sets, and the UI is not like the traditional WM UI as well, but technically it is the same OS.

I think people too easily confuse the definition of an OS.

I think the point here is you can only recreate an application store so many times before it becomes silly just like trying to make a tyre rounder. As for WP7, they're lagging so far behind all they can do is replicate what is already available and been/being done on android and iOS platforms and yes windows mobile has been around longer then both but they failed to capitalize on it or adapt to consumers and lost it... who's fault is that ? and now they come clawing back like he's saying trying to shake up a new milkshake again in the mobile market ...

Digitalx said,
I think the point here is you can only recreate an application store so many times before it becomes silly just like trying to make a tyre rounder. As for WP7, they're lagging so far behind all they can do is replicate what is already available and been/being done on android and iOS platforms and yes windows mobile has been around longer then both but they failed to capitalize on it or adapt to consumers and lost it... who's fault is that ? and now they come clawing back like he's saying trying to shake up a new milkshake again in the mobile market ...

And? So what? Who cares if they also have a app store like the others, there's enough new in WP7 to make it stand on it's own and people see that and are excited about it. His "point" is pointless, he said platform, not "app store" he was talking about the whole thing not just one part. And what he's saying is bullcrap, coming from a group and co that tries to make their own version of whatever they can and see if it sticks.

He should just work on his own stuff and STFU.

Digitalx said,
I think the point here is you can only recreate an application store so many times before it becomes silly just like trying to make a tyre rounder. As for WP7, they're lagging so far behind all they can do is replicate what is already available and been/being done on android and iOS platforms and yes windows mobile has been around longer then both but they failed to capitalize on it or adapt to consumers and lost it... who's fault is that ? and now they come clawing back like he's saying trying to shake up a new milkshake again in the mobile market ...
Once again, WP7 is not copying everything other phones are doing.

Of course it will happen. Should we all hate on other operating systems that use the right click menu? Heck no... It's just one of those things you expect all desktop operating systems to have.

But if anything, Android is mostly targeted at iPhone, as you know, it's somewhat of a copy of iPhone. Windows Phone 7? Completely different user interface...

GP007 said,

And? So what? Who cares if they also have a app store like the others, there's enough new in WP7 to make it stand on it's own and people see that and are excited about it. His "point" is pointless, he said platform, not "app store" he was talking about the whole thing not just one part. And what he's saying is bullcrap, coming from a group and co that tries to make their own version of whatever they can and see if it sticks.

He should just work on his own stuff and STFU.

Good point. What doesn't Google just copy? Another company releases something and Google immediately works to release their version just to see what happens... And here they're complaining about an existing competitor releasing a new version? Stupid.

OceanMotion said,
Free to choose, Google should know that but I guess it doesn't count when it's against them.

The whole 'shoe on the other foot' thing... Guess Google has never heard of that saying. Though no surprise. They haven't heard of a lot of things

Critical Error said,
Wow! They are affraid of WP7!

I'm sorry but why? why would they be afraid, Microsoft isn't targeting Android cause they know there'll never be able to match Android in the number of devices, Microsoft poses no threat to Android and perhaps a little threat to the iPhone and BlackBerry.

thealexweb said,

I'm sorry but why? why would they be afraid, Microsoft isn't targeting Android cause they know there'll never be able to match Android in the number of devices, Microsoft poses no threat to Android and perhaps a little threat to the iPhone and BlackBerry.

You high?

How does competing in the mobile operating system market (specifically phones) not compete with the other players? I'm pretty sure you target everyone when you enter any market that already has established buisinesses.

Balmer: "Today we announce win phone 7, it will be awesome, but not as awesome as andriod or IOS - we're just doing it for the lolz". see?

thealexweb said,

I'm sorry but why? why would they be afraid, Microsoft isn't targeting Android cause they know there'll never be able to match Android in the number of devices, Microsoft poses no threat to Android and perhaps a little threat to the iPhone and BlackBerry.

That`s like saying Pioneer are bringing out a new telly but it poses no threat to Samsung. If it`s likely to take away sales (even if only in the short term) then it`s a threat!

ZenVenT said,

You high?

How does competing in the mobile operating system market (specifically phones) not compete with the other players? I'm pretty sure you target everyone when you enter any market that already has established buisinesses.

Balmer: "Today we announce win phone 7, it will be awesome, but not as awesome as andriod or IOS - we're just doing it for the lolz". see?

+1. lol

This guys a tool, theres a reason they dont let engineers speak with customers or the public

Have you ever tried to buy a TV?
If the answer is yes, than you - a consumer - and the world can handle more choice.

Osiris said,
This guys a tool, theres a reason they dont let engineers speak with customers or the public

Have you ever tried to buy a TV?
If the answer is yes, than you - a consumer - and the world can handle more choice.

HAHAHA, Win!

Windows Mobile was around before Android, Windows Phone is just a further revision. Therefore by his argument we didn't need Android...

dave164 said,
Windows Mobile was around before Android, Windows Phone is just a further revision. Therefore by his argument we didn't need Android...

+1.
I've got a windows mobile device from back in 2003 and one from 2002.
If this is true, android should just **** off.

dave164 said,
Windows Mobile was around before Android, Windows Phone is just a further revision. Therefore by his argument we didn't need Android...

+1

dave164 said,
Windows Mobile was around before Android, Windows Phone is just a further revision. Therefore by his argument we didn't need Android...

The irony is he went and stated why I hate Android after deciding I don't need WP7. Durr...

dave164 said,
Windows Mobile was around before Android, Windows Phone is just a further revision. Therefore by his argument we didn't need Android...

+1

You're a tool. WP7 has nothing in common with WM, other than that both are from MS.

The WM platform failed. That's why the world NEEDED Android.

WP7 is indeed NOT needed, because Microsoft could simply take Android, remove the Google stuff from it and build their own top layer (Mail app, browser, music player, UI etc.).

drphysx said,
You're a tool. WP7 has nothing in common with WM, other than that both are from MS.

The WM platform failed. That's why the world NEEDED Android.

WP7 is indeed NOT needed, because Microsoft could simply take Android, remove the Google stuff from it and build their own top layer (Mail app, browser, music player, UI etc.).

OMG! Stop copy and pasting you troll.

WP7 is NEEDED because Android FAILED. It failed with horrible fragmentation issues, which Microsoft will not allow. We as consumers always win... Choice is good.

drphysx said,
You're a tool. WP7 has nothing in common with WM, other than that both are from MS.

The WM platform failed. That's why the world NEEDED Android.

WP7 is indeed NOT needed, because Microsoft could simply take Android, remove the Google stuff from it and build their own top layer (Mail app, browser, music player, UI etc.).

You're posts are so ridiculously funny. Microsoft is not NEW to the mobile market. It doesn't matter one bit that WP7 is built from scratch or not. It is replacing their previous product (Which was IN the mobile space previously to Android). And WHY would it make sense for them to take Android and just change it some and release that anyway? That means no choice for the consumer still... Yeah, that's genius...

drphysx said,
You're a tool. WP7 has nothing in common with WM, other than that both are from MS.

The WM platform failed. That's why the world NEEDED Android.

WP7 is indeed NOT needed, because Microsoft could simply take Android, remove the Google stuff from it and build their own top layer (Mail app, browser, music player, UI etc.).

OMG. An Android fanboy. That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard this week.

MorganX said,

OMG. An Android fanboy. That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard this week.


Because you're the most clueless guy on the internet.

drphysx said,
You're a tool. WP7 has nothing in common with WM, other than that both are from MS.

The WM platform failed. That's why the world NEEDED Android.

WP7 is indeed NOT needed, because Microsoft could simply take Android, remove the Google stuff from it and build their own top layer (Mail app, browser, music player, UI etc.).

They are both running WinCE 6.x, which is the same OS Microsoft introduced in 1997. It is actually an old OS that is rather mature in features.

The UI and API constructs also pre-date Android and any Android devices, go look up ZuneHD, which also runs on WinCE.

If you want to argue development platform and APIs, still, XNA and Silverlight both pre-date the Android OS and the custom Java Android Libraries.

webcivilian said,
The world doesn't need alot of OSes Google. Chrome OS anyone.

That's what they said about OS/2! Ha! um...nevermind.

webcivilian said,
The world doesn't need alot of OSes Google. Chrome OS anyone.

+1. Yeah, because who doesn't need another Linux distro?

jimmyfal said,
Pinhead.

Is he stupid or what? WP7 is not another platform. It's an update to an existing platform, which will be way letter than the Android OS.
Does google release OS updates directly to their users? Nope! Will MS? HELL YES!!!

a.d.p said,

Is he stupid or what? WP7 is not another platform. It's an update to an existing platform, which will be way letter than the Android OS.
Does google release OS updates directly to their users? Nope! Will MS? HELL YES!!!

I beg to differ for Android, and to remain neutral on OSes.

WP7 is NOT an update to an existing platform. It's a totally NEW platform that has NOTHING in common with WM.

When WM failed, the world needed a new platform: Android.

WP7 is indeed NOT needed, because Microsoft could simply take Android, remove the Google stuff from it and build their own top layer (Mail app, browser, music player, UI etc.).

That's what Android is all about. It's not just an OS for Google, it's a PLATFORM for EVERYONE.

And because Android is OPEN and FOR EVERYONE, the world DOESN't NEED another platform - especially one that's CLOSED like WP7.

The political reasons he talks about is Microsoft's "not invented here" syndrome! That's the reason why they build a new platform instead of taking the existing, open one.

Political reasons. Rubin is 100% right.

drphysx said,
WP7 is NOT an update to an existing platform. It's a totally NEW platform that has NOTHING in common with WM.

When WM failed, the world needed a new platform: Android.

WP7 is indeed NOT needed, because Microsoft could simply take Android, remove the Google stuff from it and build their own top layer (Mail app, browser, music player, UI etc.).

That's what Android is all about. It's not just an OS for Google, it's a PLATFORM for EVERYONE.

And because Android is OPEN and FOR EVERYONE, the world DOESN't NEED another platform - especially one that's CLOSED like WP7.

The political reasons he talks about is Microsoft's "not invented here" syndrome! That's the reason why they build a new platform instead of taking the existing, open one.

Political reasons. Rubin is 100% right.

When Android failed due to fragmentation issues, the world needed a new platform: Windows Phone 7.

Windows Phone 7 is needed... Arguably, Android is not. It is a copy of iPhone, WP7 is something completely new. Not only built from the ground up, it has a completely unique user interface.

Choice is good... With more choice, consumers win... Always.

Why are Google's engineers and its followers so closed minded? You would think they would be the opposite. Guess I was wrong.

drphysx said,
WP7 is NOT an update to an existing platform. It's a totally NEW platform that has NOTHING in common with WM.

When WM failed, the world needed a new platform: Android.

Was IPhone not around at that time as well?

drphysx said,
WP7 is indeed NOT needed, because Microsoft could simply take Android, remove the Google stuff from it and build their own top layer (Mail app, browser, music player, UI etc.).

That's what Android is all about. It's not just an OS for Google, it's a PLATFORM for EVERYONE.

And because Android is OPEN and FOR EVERYONE, the world DOESN't NEED another platform - especially one that's CLOSED like WP7.

So once someone releases a OPEN and FOR EVERYONE platform, nobody else is even allowed to even try in that sector? Doesn't sound like much choice there to me, "free to choose, as long as you take my choice".

drphysx said,
The political reasons he talks about is Microsoft's "not invented here" syndrome! That's the reason why they build a new platform instead of taking the existing, open one.

Political reasons. Rubin is 100% right.

Won't deny the first part, but is it the only reason?
I see too many uses of "free and open" as a reason to use something, what happened to "good"?

leeisl said,
Was IPhone not around at that time as well?

So once someone releases a OPEN and FOR EVERYONE platform, nobody else is even allowed to even try in that sector? Doesn't sound like much choice there to me, "free to choose, as long as you take my choice".

Won't deny the first part, but is it the only reason?
I see too many uses of "free and open" as a reason to use something, what happened to "good"?

+100. Good post.

jimmyfal said,
Pinhead.

Who wudda thunk it? Google doesn't think they need another competitor. Their product is all anyone needs ... to buy. Any respect I had for 'em just went out tha window.

drphysx said,
WP7 is NOT an update to an existing platform. It's a totally NEW platform that has NOTHING in common with WM.

When WM failed, the world needed a new platform: Android.

WP7 is indeed NOT needed, because Microsoft could simply take Android, remove the Google stuff from it and build their own top layer (Mail app, browser, music player, UI etc.).

That's what Android is all about. It's not just an OS for Google, it's a PLATFORM for EVERYONE.

And because Android is OPEN and FOR EVERYONE, the world DOESN't NEED another platform - especially one that's CLOSED like WP7.

The political reasons he talks about is Microsoft's "not invented here" syndrome! That's the reason why they build a new platform instead of taking the existing, open one.

Political reasons. Rubin is 100% right.


I can'y possibly explain how you remind me of Lenin in the Communist Manifesto.
"When Capitalism failed, the world needed another system: communism."
"It's a system for everyone"

leeisl said,
Was IPhone not around at that time as well?

iOS is not a platform... it's proprietary. Or have you seen it on any device without an Apple logo lately?

leeisl said,
Won't deny the first part, but is it the only reason?
I see too many uses of "free and open" as a reason to use something, what happened to "good"?

Android is good. In fact, MUCH better than WP7. I'm not saying Microsoft isn't allowed to try building their own platform. I'm just saying Rubin is right, the world doesn't need it.

"The world doesn't need it" doesn't mean that it shouldn't exist.

Mr aldo said,
When Android failed due to fragmentation issues, the world needed a new platform: Windows Phone 7.

Android is not going to fail. It already won. Did fragmentation keep Windows from owning the market? No. It won't hurt Android either.

Mr aldo said,
Windows Phone 7 is needed...

...not.

Mr aldo said,
It is a copy of iPhone, WP7 is something completely new.

Let's see... tiles? Been there, done that: Widgets.
Hubs? Been there, done that: Seamless integration of any app into the Android OS.

Seriously, there's NOTHING new in WP7. Not even one single feature. IT'S ALL BEEN DONE BEFORE.

What else is "new" is WP7?
The lack of multitasking? Done already by Apple.
The lack of file system access? Done already by Apple.
The lack of a mass storage mode? Done already by Apple.

The world does indeed not need it. It's all been done before.

Mr aldo said,
Choice is good... With more choice, consumers win... Always.

Yeah that's EXACTLY why Android is open. If Microsoft wanted, they could take it and remove all the Google stuff, put their own apps and UI on there and give consumers the CHOICE between their version of Android and Google's.

"Fragmentation" is choice, in fact.

drphysx said,

iOS is not a platform... it's proprietary. Or have you seen it on any device without an Apple logo lately?


Android is good. In fact, MUCH better than WP7. I'm not saying Microsoft isn't allowed to try building their own platform. I'm just saying Rubin is right, the world doesn't need it.

"The world doesn't need it" doesn't mean that it shouldn't exist.

Ok, after several posts it is obvious, you don't understand what 'platform' means.

thenetavenger said,

Ok, after several posts it is obvious, you don't understand what 'platform' means.


or, as an option, that he's just trolling