HTC is building a flagship Windows Phone, said to support VoLTE

Imagine this device running Windows Phone 8.1

HTC has been trying to re-make itself after the company fell on hard times when its Android phones were being over-shadowed by Samsung's Galaxy line of devices. While HTC has built Windows Phones in the past, it looks like they are about to go all-in with a new flagship Windows Phone that will be headed to Verizon.

The device will be called the One M8 for Windows, will support for VoLTE (voice over LTE), have BoomSound speakers, Duo camera support, and is said to arrive by the end of September. 

If the device looks anything like the HTC One M8 that we recently reviewed, it will be a fantastic Windows Phone made of premium materials that should give Lumia devices a run for their money.

The next update to Windows Phone, GDR 1 (or update 1) is said to support VoLTE, so this rumor aligns to that information nicely and makes it clear that this device will not ship before that update is released. The addition of VoLTE will be a good differentiator from other devices as the improved call quality really does make a difference once you hear it.

The high-end device will surely make Microsoft happy, knowing that its partners are willing to stick with the platform even after the company bought Nokia so it could produce its own device. As Microsoft is the under-dog in the mobile market, the more premium devices the company can get into the market the better, and will only improve the company's chances of clawing market share back from Apple and Google.

Source: Engadget 

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Fitbit comes to Windows Phone 8.1

Next Story

Microsoft adds another feature to Cortana, Foursquare data now serves up recommendations

25 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I'll be due an upgrade this fall and would consider this, but I'm not switching to Verizon for it. Another WP I wont be able to buy.

How does volte work? Do calls get dropped if you are out of lte range? Or are the calls treated as some kind of udp type packets that allows for dropped packets and thus the transfer to a lower tier band?

I have an Icon, which has the 800. Be nice to see that confirmed. It would make Verizon taking a while for WP8.1/Cyan more tolerable if they were waiting for GDR1 too. And it seems to have some key nice features for a GDR too.

E8 as a windows phone 8 in US would be awesome. The E8 is an m8 but plastic. I know lots of people who would buy it just to save the $200 over the metal version

Yep, don't get why companies just ship out the same crap they have with android, but with WP on it. I think that'd make enough people happy. We honestly are not asking for unique devices, just modern ones.

I think you missed a word :p There's always Nokia...On the flip side, I bet some Android users would love to see a Lumia 1020 (or any higher end Lumia) with Android on it.

Yes, please do. WP won't grow fast enough if manufacturers keep avoiding it.

A WP version of One will be quite nice.

ians18 said,
Will Volte bring anything particularly noteworthy? After all, you can't have "faster" calls.

Better quality as data can be transferred faster

Riva said,

Better quality as data can be transferred faster

Voice communications are real time. So you won't get faster data transfers, but you will get more bandwidth which allows for more data rich traffic. In the case of phone calls that means high definition codecs can be used.

LogicalApex said,

Voice communications are real time. So you won't get faster data transfers, but you will get more bandwidth which allows for more data rich traffic. In the case of phone calls that means high definition codecs can be used.

Yes, you can send more in real time because the data can be transferred faster.

mrp04 said,

Yes, you can send more in real time because the data can be transferred faster.

My point is simply that the data isn't moving faster... The speed at which packets travel is measured in latency not in bandwidth. When you're transferring files the increased bandwidth decreases download time by increasing the number of packets that can be moved at the same time (high bandwidth is usually achieved by transmitting over multiple "lines" at the same time). So people generally make bandwidth and latency the same (and this is an OK simplification for non-real-time transfers).

For real-time transfers latency is the most important factor. So you can't refer to higher bandwidth as being "faster" when referring to real-time communication. In order for it to be "faster" or "slower" you'll need to have more or less latency involved.

LogicalApex said,

My point is simply that the data isn't moving faster... The speed at which packets travel is measured in latency not in bandwidth. When you're transferring files the increased bandwidth decreases download time by increasing the number of packets that can be moved at the same time (high bandwidth is usually achieved by transmitting over multiple "lines" at the same time). So people generally make bandwidth and latency the same (and this is an OK simplification for non-real-time transfers).

For real-time transfers latency is the most important factor. So you can't refer to higher bandwidth as being "faster" when referring to real-time communication. In order for it to be "faster" or "slower" you'll need to have more or less latency involved.

More bits per second = faster transfer rate. A faster transfer rate allows you to send more data in real time than a lower transfer rate.

mrp04 said,

More bits per second = faster transfer rate. A faster transfer rate allows you to send more data in real time than a lower transfer rate.

Yes, you can send more data, but it won't move any faster. How fast the bit travels on the wire is measured in latency. Imagine it like a highway. Adding additional lanes allows more cars (bits) to travel to the destination at the same time (more bandwidth), but doesn't make any individual car (bit) arrive any sooner.

LogicalApex said,

Yes, you can send more data, but it won't move any faster. How fast the bit travels on the wire is measured in latency. Imagine it like a highway. Adding additional lanes allows more cars (bits) to travel to the destination at the same time (more bandwidth), but doesn't make any individual car (bit) arrive any sooner.


The point is you can transfer more data in the same amount of time, the latency is irrelevant to what he meant by it.

Lets leave another analogy here: what's the point in transmitting HD voice if the person at the other end hears me two seconds later - imagine communicating with a two second lag. This is the same for gaming - you can have a 100mb/s pipe, but you won't have much fun if you lag 100+ ms.

You guys are arguing the same point.

Question though, whenever I call an newer phone like an iPhone 5 or new HTC/Samsung I get a way higher call quality which I can only compare to like the X1 party chat.

What the hell is that then if VoLTE isn't out yet?

agreed its useless unless everyone has it and probably wont work in central London anyway. people here have 4g but they never get any 4g reception