Editorial

Microsoft just did what Google could not

Microsoft and Google’s strategies are quite similar in the mobile space. They each have a mobile OS, third party hardware vendors (excluding the Moto-Google deal), and have to wait for carriers to provide the updates to their hardware. But where these two differ is on their OS strategy: While Microsoft has a walled garden approach to its OS, Google is more liberal with its platform.

When you look at Google, they literally have dozens of different devices and different platforms out on the market. For Google, updating their devices is not as easy because of numerous manufacturers and various versions of the OS; this is called fragmentation.

If we look at Microsoft, they have more than a handful of devices on the market and managed to update nearly all of them at the same time to the same version of their Mango operating system. This is something Google has yet to be able to do with any version of its Android OS.

If you start to think about all of the carriers and products, you begin to see that there are hundreds of combinations of carriers + Windows Phone devices and all of them need their own version of Mango to run properly on the carriers' network. Sure, it could be a small tweak of adding carrier branding, but, it still must be done.

When you sit back and look at what Microsoft accomplished today, a near simultaneous rollout of Mango to many devices on even more carriers, you begin to understand the scope of this project. It is, by no means, an easy task.  

Google, we could fathom, had wanted this same approach to work for its products when it launched Android a few years back. But for many reasons, which could include Google not feeling the need to put pressure on carriers to update their devices, they were never able to execute a mass rollout like Microsoft just did.

In all fairness, this is Microsoft’s first major update that has gone over cleanly. Sure NoDo wasn’t perfect, but as we can see today, it was a valuable lesson in how not to execute an update. Mango, as of now, has gone over amazingly smooth, considering the breadth of coverage Microsoft had to include. The next big test will come when Microsoft has two product lifecycles on the market. We still primarily have only the initial batch of Windows Phone devices distributed to consumers, which does set Microsoft apart from Google since a new Android device is launched every week but in theory should all be running the same version of Android.

Yes, we have heard about the LG Optimus 7 issue and know that this is an isolated issue for the Mango update. But, to be fair, it has affected some users while others have reported that the update went smoothly. But as it stands now, Microsoft just executed a near perfect distribution of Mango to many devices, on many carriers, all around the world simultaneously, something Google has not been able to do. 

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Sports Illustrated models in Need For Speed The Run

Next Story

NinjaVideo cofounder pleads guilty to copyright infringement.

106 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Is WP7 available for $200? Android phones have vast range of hardware support and price tag. Smart phones WP7 and iPhone are priced above $550 which are beyond the budget of poor people. Android defiantly have helped them to use smart phones. If WP7 is available at low rate it will be super hit but I feel thay have failed to address this.

KingCrimson said,

Still early days.

Can be as many days as they like, MS will never catch Android. The fragmentation will be half the reason why. The fact that older version on android will run on lower end phones allows carriers to push out cheap smartphones to the masses that do more than enough for what the basic user needs. Spin it all they like, MS can push out this update because pretty much all WP7 phones are the same, it's no different to them pushing out a firmware update to an xbox fat and an xbox slim. They are all pretty much the same machine under a different clothing.

While I agree that it is indeed an achievement, this article lacks perspective.

The first generation of windows phone 7 phones are very homogeneous in terms of hardware capabilities (because of the requirements microsoft imposes). That helps microsoft a lot.
As for carriers, "a different version for each carrier...". If its just some parameters, parameters for ALL carriers could be baked into the same ROM like Apple does. Same goes for branding. Isnt customization severely limited in windows phone 7? what is carrier branding on windows phone 7? a different splash screen?

Dont get me wrong, I agree this is an achievement, and we all wish google could do the same with android. But the comparison is flawed, as google faces a lot more challenges to pull something like this. Microsoft just updated a single generation of phones that have all pretty much the same hardware.

Julius Caro said,
While I agree that it is indeed an achievement, this article lacks perspective.

The first generation of windows phone 7 phones are very homogeneous in terms of hardware capabilities (because of the requirements microsoft imposes). That helps microsoft a lot.
As for carriers, "a different version for each carrier...". If its just some parameters, parameters for ALL carriers could be baked into the same ROM like Apple does. Same goes for branding. Isnt customization severely limited in windows phone 7? what is carrier branding on windows phone 7? a different splash screen?

Dont get me wrong, I agree this is an achievement, and we all wish google could do the same with android. But the comparison is flawed, as google faces a lot more challenges to pull something like this. Microsoft just updated a single generation of phones that have all pretty much the same hardware.

But that's the point isn't it? Why is it SO necessary to have more different hardware models of Droid phones than grains of sand on a beach? Imposing certain hardware restrictions gives you the ability to upgrade OS at mass. Google knew this from day one. The more broader your hardware environment the harder it is to unify updates.

I mean it seems it is to the point where OEM's are fighting themselves with the number of droid handsets available. The sea of choices is ludicrous. OEM's are turning droid as a whole into how non-feature phones are handled with no updates for their OS at all past purchase date.

Google has yet to prove to me they are interested in the handheld market. Their strategy only seems like they are interested in getting you hooked on their cloud services and search engine. Android OS has been handled like a highschooler who hasnt figured out his identity yet. Devices never usually see updates past their release to consumers and that is hilarious. WP7 may not have a huge market share but its showing that small diverse hardware releases can have simultaneous OS updates.

iOS has done this for YEARS. Yeah Apple releases a SINGLE new device every year, a device that has 1/3 of the market. It has taken the 100's of different droid phones to meet its share. Apple at least updates those devices for 2 years but even 1 year of updates beats out any Droid phone I have seen.

The only reason Android has ANY kind of market share is due to its substantial less price than an iOS device. You have been able to get droid phones for practically nothing for years now and providers PUSH this so they can hook you with their plans, they have no interest in selling phones, only to get your cash for the plan. What easier way to make a plan seem more economical, here is your cheap droid smartphone that does as much as an iOS device. Since its cheap get the more expensive data plans. PROFIT.

I know this is the reason because I see it in stores, I hear it from people, and I myself have a Droid phone for the same reason. Droid may have more market share but the product SUCKS. I will take iOS or WP7 any day, sacrificing a desktop level of customization for something that runs smooth and doesnt eat my battery.

zeroomegazx said,
Google has yet to prove to me they are interested in the handheld market. Their strategy only seems like they are interested in getting you hooked on their cloud services and search engine. Android OS has been handled like a highschooler who hasnt figured out his identity yet. Devices never usually see updates past their release to consumers and that is hilarious. WP7 may not have a huge market share but its showing that small diverse hardware releases can have simultaneous OS updates.

iOS has done this for YEARS. Yeah Apple releases a SINGLE new device every year, a device that has 1/3 of the market. It has taken the 100's of different droid phones to meet its share. Apple at least updates those devices for 2 years but even 1 year of updates beats out any Droid phone I have seen.

The only reason Android has ANY kind of market share is due to its substantial less price than an iOS device. You have been able to get droid phones for practically nothing for years now and providers PUSH this so they can hook you with their plans, they have no interest in selling phones, only to get your cash for the plan. What easier way to make a plan seem more economical, here is your cheap droid smartphone that does as much as an iOS device. Since its cheap get the more expensive data plans. PROFIT.

I know this is the reason because I see it in stores, I hear it from people, and I myself have a Droid phone for the same reason. Droid may have more market share but the product SUCKS. I will take iOS or WP7 any day, sacrificing a desktop level of customization for something that runs smooth and doesnt eat my battery.

http://www.thenoisecast.com/wp.../2011/07/fanboy-anatomy.jpg

Owatonna said,
Pointless article. Was pure Microsoft fan boy article.

OMG ! Troll alert !
Quick someone censor this guy from speaking !
And i spotted him so i deserve a reward too
Ahhhh
I feel good about myself now ..im such a contributor
What would you all be reading if i didnt point out the troll ?
Something on topic maybe ? bahh Stories are boring acting like an
elitist snobby grammar nazi forum fanboy takes class !

Ill say your welcome in advance for beeing able to witness the sheer
brilliance that is my words.. I take donations here: http:\\stwtw23.com
Also follow my blog, Myspace, Facebook and Tweet account
so i can keep you all up to date with "Troll Spotting"

Be safe out there people (there is a lot of trolls that havn't been spotted yet)

Edited by I am Not PCyr, Sep 29 2011, 4:37am :

Google should not get into dictating terms for manufacturers. Otherwise, we will not have the diversity in android phones that we are seeing today. The market should do that. Consumers should opt for phones from manufacturers and carriers who have a history of providing timely updates.

raghavny80 said,
The market should do that. Consumers should opt for phones from manufacturers and carriers who have a history of providing timely updates.

And which ones would that be? From what I've seen, ALL of the OEMs and carriers suck when it comes to updating any Android phone that is more than a few months old. The "diversity" that you speak of is part of the problem, just as the vast number of Linux distros is part of the reason that more OEMs don't use it, and more big developers don't write software for it. There's something to be said for consistency, which is something that Apple and Microsoft offer in their mobile OS, but Google certainly does not.

OK, just like to add my two penneth here. Whilst I can only applaud Microsoft for delivering on their promises as opposed to Google struggling under the load of rolling out timely updates, there are a number of significant differences:

1) The sheer size of the Android estate vs Windows Phone springs to mind for a starter, but perhaps more importantly...

2) ...Android is open source, and as such has been "touched" by many of the Handset manufacturers hence the delays also.

I certainly don't like the title of this piece...doesn't give you that "warm, fuzzy, unbiased" feeling does it!

Wiggz said,
I certainly don't like the title of this piece...doesn't give you that "warm, fuzzy, unbiased" feeling does it!

To be fair, it is an editorial - they're not supposed to be unbiased.

Wiggz said,
OK, just like to add my two penneth here. Whilst I can only applaud Microsoft for delivering on their promises as opposed to Google struggling under the load of rolling out timely updates, there are a number of significant differences:

1) The sheer size of the Android estate vs Windows Phone springs to mind for a starter, but perhaps more importantly...

2) ...Android is open source, and as such has been "touched" by many of the Handset manufacturers hence the delays also.

I certainly don't like the title of this piece...doesn't give you that "warm, fuzzy, unbiased" feeling does it!

Yes, but that is a choice Google made with Android. The OS was poorly designed from the start and that is why they are in the situation they are in. If Google had even considered updates they would have designed it differently...

Fezmid said,

To be fair, it is an editorial - they're not supposed to be unbiased.

Yes, you're correct....my apologies. My assumption that, it being on the News feed, it was news was misplaced.

I also most confess my ignorance to knowing the difference between an Editorial and an Article.

because killing your warranty for an "updated" device is how a platform should be handled yea?

and that coming from an android user

Midgetman said,
because killing your warranty for an "updated" device is how a platform should be handled yea?

and that coming from an android user

Huh? Do you mean flashing a custom ROM like Android users have to do? I'm not sure I followed.

Midgetman said,
because killing your warranty for an "updated" device is how a platform should be handled yea?

and that coming from an android user

In my case, my phone is already out of warranty as I got the Captivate a few weeks after release. That's part of the complaint, right? Old devices not receiving updates? If your warranty is up anyways, why not flash some custom goodness?

If you really want the latest version and the Android OS, go out and find it! There's so many custom ROMs for almost every phone out there. The Captive is officially supposed to be on 2.2, I'm running 2.4 (leaked firmware from Samsung) because I have the motivation to do so. Do this many people complain with a new version of Windows or OS X comes out? Do you just sit around wishing you could upgrade but never do? Doubtful. You either buy it/download it, install and enjoy. Fragmentation is not an issue for me. I doubt the average person cares just as long the phone does everything they need it to do. (my 2c)

Open Minded said,
If you really want the latest version and the Android OS, go out and find it! There's so many custom ROMs for almost every phone out there. The Captive is officially supposed to be on 2.2, I'm running 2.4 (leaked firmware from Samsung) because I have the motivation to do so. Do this many people complain with a new version of Windows or OS X comes out? Do you just sit around wishing you could upgrade but never do? Doubtful. You either buy it/download it, install and enjoy. Fragmentation is not an issue for me. I doubt the average person cares just as long the phone does everything they need it to do. (my 2c)

You're clearly not an average user though. For them this is a big deal as WP7 ships updates and Android does not.

You are so blinded by the vast array of ROMs out there that you don't even understand that this is actually part of the problem! And most average users (not people like you and me, but the other 99% of smartphone owners) aren't going to take the risk of putting some ROM from some unknown source on their phone.

RW, I agree with that 100%. Like I said, as long as the phone does what the user needs it do, they're happy. Most people I talk to about their phones never mention an update to the firmware.

M_Lyons10 said,

You're clearly not an average user though. For them this is a big deal as WP7 ships updates and Android does not.

The average user doesn't know what Mango is. Unless you are telling me that only Microsoft enthusiast are only buying WP7? Then I would be dead wrong.

But from my experience the average user has no clue what iOS they are running, and they have no clue about Android versions and they certainly don't know what WP7 is.

So all this software update is nonsense. For the WP7 enthusiast, you get it right away. For the Android enthusiast, you get it right away via custom ROMs. For everybody else, they couldn't tell you which dessert their phone has (Apple vs Mango vs Gingerbread). LOL

In fact, just the other day somebody was asking me about the Bionic, I told him I don't like Motorola phones. He said "but I thought you like Google phones". He thought only Motorola makes "Google" phones. *Face Palm

What's so special ? Apple does this for years while supporting 3 generations of devices and 3 different platforms (iPhone, iPod ,iPad) all running the same OS.

alexalex said,
What's so special ? Apple does this for years while supporting 3 generations of devices and 3 different platforms (iPhone, iPod ,iPad) all running the same OS.

Spot on.

For example:

Apple TV 2 Beta 6 AppleTV2,1_4.4_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 377.65 MB
iPad 2 (CDMA) iOS 5 Beta 7 iPad2,3_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 735.07 MB
iPad 2 (GSM) iOS 5 Beta 7 iPad2,2_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 729.63 MB
iPad 2 (WiFi) iOS 5 Beta 7 iPad2,1_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 721.09 MB
iPad iOS 5 Beta 7 iPad1,1_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 714.01 MB
iPhone 4 (CDMA) iOS 5 Beta 7 iPhone3,3_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 792.46 MB
iPhone 4 (GSM) iOS 5 Beta 7 iPhone3,1_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 784.55 MB
iPhone 3G[S] iOS 5 Beta 7 iPhone2,1_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 669.24 MB
iPod Touch 4 iOS 5 Beta 7 iPod4,1_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 772.35 MB
iPod Touch 3 iOS 5 Beta 7 iPod3,1_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 638.45 MB

That's 10 different devices right away. All roll out globally at the same time to everyone if they so choose to.

That's 10 devices that Apple owns and controls. They aren't by separate vendors who give end users choice of hardware for the Windows Phone software to run on. Apple is not a valid comparison point, Android is.

Tom W said,
That's 10 devices that Apple owns and controls. They aren't by separate vendors who give end users choice of hardware for the Windows Phone software to run on. Apple is not a valid comparison point, Android is.

+1

Tom W said,
That's 10 devices that Apple owns and controls. They aren't by separate vendors who give end users choice of hardware for the Windows Phone software to run on. Apple is not a valid comparison point, Android is.

+1

Tom W said,
That's 10 devices that Apple owns and controls. They aren't by separate vendors who give end users choice of hardware for the Windows Phone software to run on. Apple is not a valid comparison point, Android is.

It is roughly the same number of different devices that were updated with Mango. And Microsoft's hardware restrictions made the devices far more similar to each other than the vast array of different Android devices, which also puts them more like Apple than Google. Like it or not, Microsoft's approach is far more like Apple's than Google's.

chrispinto said,

Spot on.

For example:

Apple TV 2 Beta 6 AppleTV2,1_4.4_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 377.65 MB
iPad 2 (CDMA) iOS 5 Beta 7 iPad2,3_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 735.07 MB
iPad 2 (GSM) iOS 5 Beta 7 iPad2,2_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 729.63 MB
iPad 2 (WiFi) iOS 5 Beta 7 iPad2,1_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 721.09 MB
iPad iOS 5 Beta 7 iPad1,1_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 714.01 MB
iPhone 4 (CDMA) iOS 5 Beta 7 iPhone3,3_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 792.46 MB
iPhone 4 (GSM) iOS 5 Beta 7 iPhone3,1_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 784.55 MB
iPhone 3G[S] iOS 5 Beta 7 iPhone2,1_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 669.24 MB
iPod Touch 4 iOS 5 Beta 7 iPod4,1_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 772.35 MB
iPod Touch 3 iOS 5 Beta 7 iPod3,1_5.0_9A5313e_Restore.ipsw 638.45 MB

That's 10 different devices right away. All roll out globally at the same time to everyone if they so choose to.

Hmm. The article is about what Microsoft did that Google could not. Do you want Neowin to write an article about what Apple did that Google could not? If so, let the writers of this blog know

You know what, I'll take fragmentation and kick ass hardware over the horrible hardware choices for WP7. Sprint's WP7 options automatically kill the platform for me.

ew2x4 said,
You know what, I'll take fragmentation and kick ass hardware over the horrible hardware choices for WP7. Sprint's WP7 options automatically kill the platform for me.

There needs to be more choice, I agree. Hopefully the hardware that comes out this fall will give us more choice.

WizardCM said,
What's this about an LG Optimus 7 issue?!

1 device out of many.

Android faced the same issue when it was the froyo update prepared by one company for one device. This is 1 update for all WP7 devices.

Apple have had updates fail on their devices as well, and they are in control of the entire chain.
MS will resolve the issue, no worries there.

Digitalx said,
They're both equally bad when it comes to releasing minor updates.

What are you talking about. NoDo might have had its problems but it was their first update and they clearly learned from it. As bad as that update roll out was though, lets compare it to Android where you NEVER get updates...

M_Lyons10 said,

What are you talking about. NoDo might have had its problems but it was their first update and they clearly learned from it. As bad as that update roll out was though, lets compare it to Android where you NEVER get updates...

Cause you do it yourself if you really want minor or any updates in a hurry on android. You get major releases when the maker feels like it which isn't that bad since they shoulder the burden and not Google unless you have a nexus device in which case you get regular updates.

The platforms are so different. What Microsoft did was awesome, deliver updates to WP7 devices without carriers getting in the way. Google/carriers can't pull that off because there are ton of Android devices, but also because there is no way software like Zune for Android that can apply updates. With Android, the update has to be pushed out OTA (yeah not all true as there are update packages on computers, but still not an easy process as WP7).

But, what Android does have are devs. and ROMS. A true geek knows that ROMS are better than the stock carrier software. So, by nature geeks will want the customizations of Android, but with the speedy upgrade process of WP7.

I love my WP7, but I also like Android. I wish someone could fuze the Android marketplace + Flash with WP7.

Jbenisek said,
The speed of zune on my updated phone is amazing. WOW!!!! Xbox live load speed is fast.

The whole OS feels faster (And the OS was fast to begin with). And I have more free space too...

Excuse me, but don't you think Microsoft owe it to the Windows Phone 7 customers to give them this big update? Also for you all to sit here and compare Google to Windows Phone, keep in mind all the features that Windows Phone 7 is getting in a fruit bowl is all the features that Android and the iPhone have been had. While Microsoft is bringing their phone up to date after a year, Apple and Google are onto the next phase. How long will it take Microsoft this time to catch up..another year?

JSYOUNG571 said,
Excuse me, but don't you think Microsoft owe it to the Windows Phone 7 customers to give them this big update? Also for you all to sit here and compare Google to Windows Phone, keep in mind all the features that Windows Phone 7 is getting in a fruit bowl is all the features that Android and the iPhone have been had. While Microsoft is bringing their phone up to date after a year, Apple and Google are onto the next phase. How long will it take Microsoft this time to catch up..another year?

What does features have to do with how smooth an update goes

JSYOUNG571 said,
Apple and Google are onto the next phase. How long will it take Microsoft this time to catch up..another year?

Yeah clearly, iOS 5 is on another 'phase' pffft... they copied WP7 and Android features. How long did it take for Microsoft to get where Android and iOS are today in terms of features? A lot more less time than the competition. Microsoft is king in making OS, they're never late.

JSYOUNG571 said,
Excuse me, but don't you think Microsoft owe it to the Windows Phone 7 customers to give them this big update? Also for you all to sit here and compare Google to Windows Phone, keep in mind all the features that Windows Phone 7 is getting in a fruit bowl is all the features that Android and the iPhone have been had. While Microsoft is bringing their phone up to date after a year, Apple and Google are onto the next phase. How long will it take Microsoft this time to catch up..another year?

I love this nonsense. Is that why iOS is now copying features in WP7? WP7 is far and away a better OS that is getting their competition to try to improve their products. This update was certainly not just to "catch up"...

I thought part of the appeal of Android for OEMs and Carriers was the fragmentation for the normal consumer. Under Microsoft and Apple, everyone gets everything, leaving minimal differentiation compared to Android. With Android, the OEM and Carrier can both decide to withhold updates to help establish a particular phone as entry level, mid-tier or premium, plus force it to become functionally obsolete faster as the marketplace leaves it behind.

Certainly, I think that's one reason Android is pushed so hard, and will continue to do well with carriers and OEMs - they have more control over it than they would with WP7 and iOS. Its not ideal for consumers, but by giving their business partners so much control I think Google has ensured their long-term success/profitability in this area. Microsoft, on the other hand, is doing something I like better as a consumer, but there doesn't seem to be the same level of excitement from their partners or consumers as a result of their standardization/uniformity.

I could well be wrong, mind you. I am a VERY happy WP7 owner, and know many Android owners who love their phones. To me, so long as you're making an educated decision on your platform, you'll be happy. For me WP7 represents a nice, but not perfect, middle-ground between Apple's "Our way or no way" and Android's "Anything goes." Its got some advantages from both, but not all, certainly. And, that's fine... as long as its profitable for Microsoft and their partners I'm happy, although ideally they'll never be more than 3rd place - I like Microsoft best when they're behind, not leading

I love my Windows Phone, but this update was hardly smooth. I had to do the ethernet trick in order to get the update to show up in Zune. The normal clueless user might still be waiting days before they get prompted to update.

Darrian said,
I love my Windows Phone, but this update was hardly smooth. I had to do the ethernet trick in order to get the update to show up in Zune. The normal clueless user might still be waiting days before they get prompted to update.
You did not have to do the ethernet trick, only the anxious geeks had to do the ethernet trick (me included). Had I not cared, I would have waited for it to roll on down to me whenever.

Darrian said,
I love my Windows Phone, but this update was hardly smooth. I had to do the ethernet trick in order to get the update to show up in Zune. The normal clueless user might still be waiting days before they get prompted to update.

ehmmm you actually did that because YOU wanted to. Microsoft didn't tell you to do that. it was matter of days and you just did it because you werent patient enough.

and you dont understand that most carriers are giving the update in these days? its not like people would have waited weeks like or months like nodo.

Darrian said,
I love my Windows Phone, but this update was hardly smooth. I had to do the ethernet trick in order to get the update to show up in Zune. The normal clueless user might still be waiting days before they get prompted to update.

You did that because you're an impatient geek like we all are

My family and friends who own WP 7 devices had no clue that Mango was our was due out anytime soon. So they wouldn't have been put off by getting a notice next week instead of today. They aren't following all of this like the rest of us .

The point was that there are still plenty of people out there who probably do not have the update yet or even know there is an update to be had, therefore they did not roll out Mango to everybody who was scheduled to receive it today. And yes, I am an impatient geek; when I'm told an update is coming on a specific date I expect it to come on that day, and when it didn't I happened to have the knowledge that enabled me to get it anyway, which was not nearly a smooth process. Even the update itself, assuming one got it "normally," takes forever to install and doesn't really give you any progress indication, so I have to wonder how many people screwed it up unplugging their phones because they thought the update had hung.

Darrian said,
The point was that there are still plenty of people out there who probably do not have the update yet or even know there is an update to be had, therefore they did not roll out Mango to everybody who was scheduled to receive it today. And yes, I am an impatient geek; when I'm told an update is coming on a specific date I expect it to come on that day, and when it didn't I happened to have the knowledge that enabled me to get it anyway, which was not nearly a smooth process. Even the update itself, assuming one got it "normally," takes forever to install and doesn't really give you any progress indication, so I have to wonder how many people screwed it up unplugging their phones because they thought the update had hung.

It did a good job giving me a progress. It told me how many steps there were and how far along it was at each step. The longest part by far is the backup, but the average user will be happy to have that in place.

Darrian said,
The point was that there are still plenty of people out there who probably do not have the update yet or even know there is an update to be had, therefore they did not roll out Mango to everybody who was scheduled to receive it today. And yes, I am an impatient geek; when I'm told an update is coming on a specific date I expect it to come on that day, and when it didn't I happened to have the knowledge that enabled me to get it anyway, which was not nearly a smooth process. Even the update itself, assuming one got it "normally," takes forever to install and doesn't really give you any progress indication, so I have to wonder how many people screwed it up unplugging their phones because they thought the update had hung.

They didn't say eveyone was going to get the update today, they said they would start rolling out updates today. If you go to the "Where is my update" page you would see that "Delivering update" means that "Microsoft has started to send out the update. And to help ensure quality, software updates are typically sent out gradually and/or in batches, so it might take several weeks before you receive notice that an update is available for your phone.

Darrian said,
I love my Windows Phone, but this update was hardly smooth. I had to do the ethernet trick in order to get the update to show up in Zune. The normal clueless user might still be waiting days before they get prompted to update.

Yeah? And they were supposed to wait days. That's what a "staggered release" is... ?

Darrian said,
The point was that there are still plenty of people out there who probably do not have the update yet or even know there is an update to be had, therefore they did not roll out Mango to everybody who was scheduled to receive it today. And yes, I am an impatient geek; when I'm told an update is coming on a specific date I expect it to come on that day, and when it didn't I happened to have the knowledge that enabled me to get it anyway, which was not nearly a smooth process. Even the update itself, assuming one got it "normally," takes forever to install and doesn't really give you any progress indication, so I have to wonder how many people screwed it up unplugging their phones because they thought the update had hung.

So now they screwed up the update because it took too long to install? I got progress on my phone as well as on the desktop as well. Some were steps instead of percentages, but it certainly was clear...

Darrian said,
It told me which step it was on, but no percentages. From what I have read in other forums that's not uncommon.

I have to agree on this point (but that is all I agree with you on, otherwise, you are out in left field). The lack of a percentage readout was annoying. Hell, even just putting a box around the progress indicator on the phone's display so you could somewhat gauge how far along it was would have been nice. All you get is a white line that slowly gets longer, with no idea where it is supposed to stop at. Not a good UI for a progress indicator at all.

roadwarrior said,

I have to agree on this point (but that is all I agree with you on, otherwise, you are out in left field). The lack of a percentage readout was annoying. Hell, even just putting a box around the progress indicator on the phone's display so you could somewhat gauge how far along it was would have been nice. All you get is a white line that slowly gets longer, with no idea where it is supposed to stop at. Not a good UI for a progress indicator at all.

Well your phone's screen is only so wide correct? Couldn't you assume if the bar was roughly halfway across the screen, it was probably about 50% done with that step? I watched my co-worker update is WP7 yesterday afternoon, saw the same progress bar you're mentioning, and never thought anything of it. Neither did he.

Darrian said,
I love my Windows Phone, but this update was hardly smooth. I had to do the ethernet trick in order to get the update to show up in Zune. The normal clueless user might still be waiting days before they get prompted to update.

Wow, you are conflating seamless with impatience. It isn't just about server load on the update downloads, as carriers have to ramp up to support the loads and new type of integration with their services as well. Which have been tested and most are live, but not at the mass level. So they trickle out a batches in case there is an infrustructure issue.

This has nothing to do with the 'seamless' roll out. It also misses the point that all existing devices, with a few minor exceptions have access to the new version and will have version parity.

Which is something even Apple hasn't been able to maintain, with the feature and discrepancies between iPhone versions that each iOS update deals with. Even though the iPhone3 should be able to have some iOS 4 features, it doesn't get them, because it was too much work, and Apple would rather just sell them a new phone. (Apple does this with Macs as well, and don't even provide vital security updates for older computers.)

Android also hasn't and WON'T ever do this, as Google has burned bridges with OEMs and Carriers, and for 99% of the shipping Android devices, the version you bought on the phone is ALL you will ever get. Android when from open and update-able to more closed than modern TVs and their firmware. (Sad...)

figgy said,
Doesn't Apple do the same thing?
i.e. update device on multiple carriers.

Apple does release an update across carriers, but the hardware is the same. So they aren't dealing with a variety of OEMs on the hardware site. Microsoft is.

figgy said,
Doesn't Apple do the same thing?
i.e. update device on multiple carriers.

No they dont. The verizon iphone 4 is still on a lesser version of ios4 then the gsm iphone 4

Frazell Thomas said,

Apple does release an update across carriers, but the hardware is the same. So they aren't dealing with a variety of OEMs on the hardware site. Microsoft is.

What happens here is that people taking one thing and using it to compare the three real competitors in this area, which is a huge mistake.

First Apple has the credit for introducing real whole firmwares updates to a cell phone but they only had to do it for a single device, yet that makes your phone almost obsolete after a couple of big number versions (but who uses the same high tech gadget for two years)

Google is the champion of open source, they proved how you don't have to lock down and control everything in an OS in order to work, but you end up with fragmentation.

Finally MS being the last to enter the race was able to learn from the mistakes of the formers and do it at least for now quite well, they have differents devices and were able to bring the update yet they still are just beggining the more devices have their OS the more likely it would get fragmentation like Google.

figgy said,
Doesn't Apple do the same thing?
i.e. update device on multiple carriers.

It's similar but not the same. They don't have to worry about device specific drivers being different, hardware changes (Which can be significant - see the Samsung Issues...), etc.

Microsoft managed to pull this off because:
1. All the devices they are updating belong to the same generation
2. The OS is locked down to customization to third parties.

I will give MS credit for pulling this off if:
1. They manage to do this when they have more phones on the market (if that ever happens)
2. When Nokia has made some customizations to the vanilla WP7

recursive said,
Microsoft managed to pull this off because:
1. All the devices they are updating belong to the same generation
2. The OS is locked down to customization to third parties.

I will give MS credit for pulling this off if:
1. They manage to do this when they have more phones on the market (if that ever happens)
2. When Nokia has made some customizations to the vanilla WP7

You have to give credit where due. Google has the same choices that Microsoft did when they started. Meaning they could have controlled the hardware if they needed to so they could deliver timely updates. They could have also put a limit on OEM changes so they could deliver updates. The reality is Google doesn't have the same priority for updates that Microsoft does.

The reason is though they didn't see that updates were so important when they started. Apple was just starting it and updates weren't the golden standard that they are now. There are some benefits of coming in "late".

recursive said,
Microsoft managed to pull this off because:
1. All the devices they are updating belong to the same generation
2. The OS is locked down to customization to third parties.

I will give MS credit for pulling this off if:
1. They manage to do this when they have more phones on the market (if that ever happens)
2. When Nokia has made some customizations to the vanilla WP7


I don't think #1 is true or it matters. It's having to support the next batch of phones as well with new features etc. I don't think more generations will slow it down just that older generations might not support some new features.

This was the most advanced and sleek update for phones to date.

Frazell Thomas said,

You have to give credit where due. Google has the same choices that Microsoft did when they started. Meaning they could have controlled the hardware if they needed to so they could deliver timely updates. They could have also put a limit on OEM changes so they could deliver updates. The reality is Google doesn't have the same priority for updates that Microsoft does.

The reason is though they didn't see that updates were so important when they started. Apple was just starting it and updates weren't the golden standard that they are now. There are some benefits of coming in "late".

Comparing MS and Android market share in mobile market it should be easy to see which one made the right choice, doesn 't it?

Besides this "fragmentation issue" seems questionable to say the least; MS succeeded in the PC market and the OS supports a vast variety of hardware and customization; the heavy attempts of interfering by OEM and, worst of the worst, carriers is what is penalizing the mobile segment since its inception.

Fritzly said,

Comparing MS and Android market share in mobile market it should be easy to see which one made the right choice, doesn 't it?

Woah, these fanboys never understand do they? How old is WP7, tell me... and now what about Android.

Fritzly said,

Comparing MS and Android market share in mobile market it should be easy to see which one made the right choice, doesn 't it?

Besides this "fragmentation issue" seems questionable to say the least; MS succeeded in the PC market and the OS supports a vast variety of hardware and customization; the heavy attempts of interfering by OEM and, worst of the worst, carriers is what is penalizing the mobile segment since its inception.

You troll EVERY WP7 story on here, and yet your nonsense still amazes me. You my friend are so clueless I don't even know what to say at this point...

Frazell Thomas said,

You have to give credit where due. Google has the same choices that Microsoft did when they started. Meaning they could have controlled the hardware if they needed to so they could deliver timely updates. They could have also put a limit on OEM changes so they could deliver updates. The reality is Google doesn't have the same priority for updates that Microsoft does.

The reason is though they didn't see that updates were so important when they started. Apple was just starting it and updates weren't the golden standard that they are now. There are some benefits of coming in "late".

+1. I don't see how someone can just say "Eh, what Microsoft did was impressive and something their competition cannot seem to do, but I'm not going to give them credit for it..." What a bunch of nonsense. LOL

Anooxy said,

Woah, these fanboys never understand do they? How old is WP7, tell me... and now what about Android.

For your information I own a HTC HD7; besides when you launch a new product and begin loosing instead of increasing market share.... I see a problem.
Granted I am able to separate personal preferences and objective analysis.........
Furthermore i do not see Mango as a game changer; hopefully WP8 will be....

M_Lyons10 said,

You troll EVERY WP7 story on here, and yet your nonsense still amazes me. You my friend are so clueless I don't even know what to say at this point...

If in your World someone who disagree is a troll I have no problem with that......

Besides I am not surprised that you do not know what to say: labeling people as "Clueless" without elaborating about it is a clear explanation why you do not what to say........

Google really dropped the ball on end user experience once it leaves the factory. Love the Microsoft was able to get it right, onward and upward for WP7!

Nice read Brad

gregalto said,
Google really dropped the ball on end user experience once it leaves the factory. Love the Microsoft was able to get it right, onward and upward for WP7!

Nice read Brad

+1

Misleading title..

based on this quote:

"But for many reasons, which could include Google not feeling the need to put pressure on carriers to update their devices, they were never able to execute a mass rollout like Microsoft just did."

It should be Microsoft just did what google doesn't give a **** about doing.

firey said,
Misleading title..

I guess that's one way to attract people (more like flamers) to start commenting and making the hot topic.

firey said,

It should be Microsoft just did what google doesn't give a **** about doing.

So you're basically saying they don't give a **** about supporting their users? That's great.

wixostrix said,

So you're basically saying they don't give a **** about supporting their users? That's great.

Well, in fairness, Google really had no idea how to do this I think. It's a very complex thing to try to do. And I would agree that once they ship the OS on a phone, they don't really seem to care much if it ever gets the update. They'll just sell a new phone... Not a very customer oriented approach...

Yea, dumb title. WP7 isnt very popular and not alot of devices out. Google grew to big for its own good and now getting the OS updated on every device is a big problem. Also, phone manufacturers went crazy with the UI. Hopefully they get this under control but it doesnt look like it will happen anytime soon. If WP7 starts doing well, I may be switching...but we shall see.

Its not like Google cannot do it...its that they didnt do it soon enough and now it will be difficult, not impossible, to do.

techbeck said,
Yea, dumb title. WP7 isnt very popular and not alot of devices out. Google grew to big for its own good and now getting the OS updated on every device is a big problem. Also, phone manufacturers went crazy with the UI. Hopefully they get this under control but it doesnt look like it will happen anytime soon. If WP7 starts doing well, I may be switching...but we shall see.

Its not like Google cannot do it...its that they didnt do it soon enough and now it will be difficult, not impossible, to do.


It will be almost impossible unless they totally reinvent it and stop any carrier or device from making edits to it.

Gaffney said,

It will be almost impossible unless they totally reinvent it and stop any carrier or device from making edits to it.

Limit what the carriers can do...but still allow the modding from places like XDA. If people want to void their warranty, its their problem.

techbeck said,

Limit what the carriers can do...but still allow the modding from places like XDA. If people want to void their warranty, its their problem.

Anyone ever told you less is more?

techbeck said,
Yea, dumb title. WP7 isnt very popular and not alot of devices out. Google grew to big for its own good and now getting the OS updated on every device is a big problem. Also, phone manufacturers went crazy with the UI. Hopefully they get this under control but it doesnt look like it will happen anytime soon. If WP7 starts doing well, I may be switching...but we shall see.

Its not like Google cannot do it...its that they didnt do it soon enough and now it will be difficult, not impossible, to do.

Interesting, your lack of understanding, accidentally demonstrates why your conclusion is inaccurate.

Google messed up when they didn't set a limit to the customization that they allowed carriers and OEMs, which is exactly the problem with Android.

So not only does Google not have any community level standards to adhere too, they also don't require OEMs or carriers to adhere to any set of standards.

This is why so many technologies and specifically OS technologies failed in the past. Except with Android, it has three tiers of fragmentation.

Carriers/OEMs cannot maintain the updates and their own changes, as it becomes expensive fast, because they are having to write, compile/build, and test Android for each phone on each carrier. If you take a company like HTC that has 5 phones and 20 carriers, that is 100 of these processes that have to happen between HTC and each of the carriers.

That is a lot of work, and costs a lot of money, and Android ROM coding is not easy work. It is a rather complex OS model that uses generic pieces of Linux, that is then managed in the Dalvik VM for handling memory and other things that normally the kernel would handle. This makes it 'sloppy complex' instead of 'feature complex'.

Then there are the developers that have to target various versions, screen sizes, and even GPU features on a per phone, per carrier basis.

And then you have the users, that will notice that even if they have the same phone as their friend, they often don't have the same access to apps or features of the phone. (Notice two users with a v1.6 model from a carrier, and the v 2.1 from another carrier - One can run Google Earth, etc. The other one can't.)


The other part of your post that you don't see to realize is that Google will NOT get this right, or they would have tried to fix it already or made moves to get a handle on these issues, and instead they have made it worse, with their 'forward plans' continuing to make it worse.

The Google developers are not brilliant either, as a lot of this code was not theirs, and they don't understand why it was created and works like it does. Google bought all the pieces of Android and slapped it together. I have seen posts from a Google developer talking about scheduling threads on Androids, and they didn't know the difference between async and parallel. That is just freaking scary...

Google as a company also doesn't understand why they are messing up, as they are still seeing good adoption rate, etc. Wordperfect, Novell, and Lotus all had this myopic mindset too back in 1990. In two years they were done.

Google should instead be paying attention to what has worked and why. They should be watching Microsoft especially.

Microsoft is handling WP7 in a very good way, as they are using the same model the used with Windows 3.x. They are providing a general purpose OS, with a set base line of hardware requirements, and a very expansive and open model of adding to the OS that doesn't require changing the OS.

In the 1990s, this is why Win 3.x was successful, as hardware makers no longer had to deal with providing an OS themselves and maintaining the OS themselves. This was all Microsoft's responsibility, saving the computer OEMs a lot of money. This is also one reason computers themselves got cheaper and the cost of the OS itself and 'maintenance' contracts were a thing of the past for general consumers.

Google doesn't get this. OEMs don't want to have to build and keep an OS updated, they just want to make good hardware. Consumers don't want inconsistency that separates them from their friends.

Apple almost has the right idea, except they offer consumers no choice in hardware features.

WP7 gives OEMs the ability to just build the hardware, and it gives consumers consistency and hardware options and choices. This is what worked before and is the best combination of the Apple model of fully closed, and the Google model of being so open they don't do crap for the hardware makers or consumers.

thenetavenger said,

Interesting, your lack of understanding, accidentally demonstrates why your conclusion is inaccurate.

Google messed up when they didn't set a limit to the customization that they allowed carriers and OEMs, which is exactly the problem with Android.

So not only does Google not have any community level standards to adhere too, they also don't require OEMs or carriers to adhere to any set of standards.

This is why so many technologies and specifically OS technologies failed in the past. Except with Android, it has three tiers of fragmentation.

Carriers/OEMs cannot maintain the updates and their own changes, as it becomes expensive fast, because they are having to write, compile/build, and test Android for each phone on each carrier. If you take a company like HTC that has 5 phones and 20 carriers, that is 100 of these processes that have to happen between HTC and each of the carriers.

That is a lot of work, and costs a lot of money, and Android ROM coding is not easy work. It is a rather complex OS model that uses generic pieces of Linux, that is then managed in the Dalvik VM for handling memory and other things that normally the kernel would handle. This makes it 'sloppy complex' instead of 'feature complex'.

Then there are the developers that have to target various versions, screen sizes, and even GPU features on a per phone, per carrier basis.

And then you have the users, that will notice that even if they have the same phone as their friend, they often don't have the same access to apps or features of the phone. (Notice two users with a v1.6 model from a carrier, and the v 2.1 from another carrier - One can run Google Earth, etc. The other one can't.)


The other part of your post that you don't see to realize is that Google will NOT get this right, or they would have tried to fix it already or made moves to get a handle on these issues, and instead they have made it worse, with their 'forward plans' continuing to make it worse.

The Google developers are not brilliant either, as a lot of this code was not theirs, and they don't understand why it was created and works like it does. Google bought all the pieces of Android and slapped it together. I have seen posts from a Google developer talking about scheduling threads on Androids, and they didn't know the difference between async and parallel. That is just freaking scary...

Google as a company also doesn't understand why they are messing up, as they are still seeing good adoption rate, etc. Wordperfect, Novell, and Lotus all had this myopic mindset too back in 1990. In two years they were done.

Google should instead be paying attention to what has worked and why. They should be watching Microsoft especially.

Microsoft is handling WP7 in a very good way, as they are using the same model the used with Windows 3.x. They are providing a general purpose OS, with a set base line of hardware requirements, and a very expansive and open model of adding to the OS that doesn't require changing the OS.

In the 1990s, this is why Win 3.x was successful, as hardware makers no longer had to deal with providing an OS themselves and maintaining the OS themselves. This was all Microsoft's responsibility, saving the computer OEMs a lot of money. This is also one reason computers themselves got cheaper and the cost of the OS itself and 'maintenance' contracts were a thing of the past for general consumers.

Google doesn't get this. OEMs don't want to have to build and keep an OS updated, they just want to make good hardware. Consumers don't want inconsistency that separates them from their friends.

Apple almost has the right idea, except they offer consumers no choice in hardware features.

WP7 gives OEMs the ability to just build the hardware, and it gives consumers consistency and hardware options and choices. This is what worked before and is the best combination of the Apple model of fully closed, and the Google model of being so open they don't do crap for the hardware makers or consumers.

Very well said

thenetavenger said,

The Google developers are not brilliant either, as a lot of this code was not theirs, and they don't understand why it was created and works like it does. Google bought all the pieces of Android and slapped it together. I have seen posts from a Google developer talking about scheduling threads on Androids, and they didn't know the difference between async and parallel. That is just freaking scary...

I do not know how many google developer you know or where you heard them said that they dont' fully understand one of the most basic component of OS such as sheduling, but you can't just say google developers are not smart. Because we are talking about the team of developers that created, maintain and provide updates/patches for a mobile OS (either using the existing codes or write a new) that has the biggest market share in current Mobile OS market. It can't be just luck, right?

thenetavenger said,

Google doesn't get this. OEMs don't want to have to build and keep an OS updated, they just want to make good hardware. Consumers don't want inconsistency that separates them from their friends.

You cannot say that either. Because OEM such as HTC are proud of their own UI such as HTC Sense. Consumers have different tastes/likes, which is why we have more than one Mobile OS. Some like IPhone, some like Android and some WP7. It's the same thing with Android, some like HTC, some like Samsaung and some like Stock OS. It's like having a choice. And, you and I both know that these days consumers like having a choice. Even though it is hard for the OEM to maintain their own separate fragmentation of android, each of them like to differentiate from one another. Because when it comes to Mobile, it's the OS that matter more but not just the hardware. It's the same with WP7 even and that's why Nokia had a deal with Microsoft to customize the OS, no?

morrizz said,

I do not know how many google developer you know or where you heard them said that they dont' fully understand one of the most basic component of OS such as sheduling, but you can't just say google developers are not smart. Because we are talking about the team of developers that created, maintain and provide updates/patches for a mobile OS (either using the existing codes or write a new) that has the biggest market share in current Mobile OS market. It can't be just luck, right?

You cannot say that either. Because OEM such as HTC are proud of their own UI such as HTC Sense. Consumers have different tastes/likes, which is why we have more than one Mobile OS. Some like IPhone, some like Android and some WP7. It's the same thing with Android, some like HTC, some like Samsaung and some like Stock OS. It's like having a choice. And, you and I both know that these days consumers like having a choice. Even though it is hard for the OEM to maintain their own separate fragmentation of android, each of them like to differentiate from one another. Because when it comes to Mobile, it's the OS that matter more but not just the hardware. It's the same with WP7 even and that's why Nokia had a deal with Microsoft to customize the OS, no?

1) I can say that, as Google does not have the level of skill set engineers as the companies they are competing against, Apple and Microsoft. Google has NO experience with OS design, and it shows by the basic fact they had to purchase the JVM and Android technologies, instead of implementing their own.

This isn't rocket science, but yet they turned to existing projects that had a different focus, and then shoved them together and tried to make them fit something they were never designed to do.

As for the comment about the developers, that was just one day, and if you spend much time on the Google developer forums or interacting with the Android developers, you will find your jaw dropping open if you have any programming or OS engineering background. (Seriously, he was arguing that async programming and parallel programming constructs were synonymous - was just a 'whoops' moment, it was a arrogant rant that a freaking Google Search would have clarified so he didn't look incompetent. Which raises a bigger question, why would this person be on the team and working with things that a CS 101 student could explain to him?

Would you buy a car from a company where the person engineering the brakes doesn't understand the difference between pneumatics and hydraulics?

It does not reflect well on their development team and managers.


2) HTC Sense is not a very good example, and kind of crazy that you are using it to defend Android. Here is why...

It is implemented on Android just like it is implemented on WP7. It is just a set of Apps with the HTC Sense look and their concept on usability and interacting with devices.

On Android they are implemented in a custom theme, Widgets and Apps, on WP7 they are implemented in Tiles, the HTC Hub, and Apps.

You do realize that HTC Sense is the current version of HTC TouchFLO that was designed for HTC PocketPC smartphones, right? (PocketPC = Windows Mobile)

So HTC Sense was running on Windows Phones before Android existed.

Are you starting to see why your example is rather bad?

Because Android doesn't support some of the graphical features that HTC Sense/TouchFLO 3D needed, they HAD to created a custom version of Android and even create new API sets and other modifications to make it work. (On Windows Mobile, they didn't.)

On WP7, HTC can't replace the Metro Tiles, but they can 'use' them. They also offer the HTC Hub and the HTC Sense features from the famous Weather App to sound and phone interaction Apps.

And they didn't have to create their own version of WP7 to do this...

WP7 is a better example of what you are talking about than Android - especially for HTC. As they started out using the same Windows model of 'adding to the OS' instead of creating their own version of the OS.

Like I said, an extensible OS that doesn't have to be modified.


**Seriously, go look up HTC Sense, even wiki it.

techbeck said,
Yea, dumb title. WP7 isnt very popular and not alot of devices out. Google grew to big for its own good and now getting the OS updated on every device is a big problem. Also, phone manufacturers went crazy with the UI. Hopefully they get this under control but it doesnt look like it will happen anytime soon. If WP7 starts doing well, I may be switching...but we shall see.

Its not like Google cannot do it...its that they didnt do it soon enough and now it will be difficult, not impossible, to do.

It's more like Android was poorly designed from the start and they now have no way to deliver such an update... Whereas WP7 is a much better designed OS front to back...

M_Lyons10 said,

It's more like Android was poorly designed from the start and they now have no way to deliver such an update... Whereas WP7 is a much better designed OS front to back...

Bingo...

In theory, Google could have changed direction and recreated Android and dealt with fragmentation, but instead they kept making things worse and cobbling the OS with a head smacking lack of understanding.

As they were hitting v2.2, they took the poor memory management and made it worse with less application priority and to try to get speed, they remove the ability for developers to compensate and 'swap or save state' of their applications before they are almost randomly terminated by Android.

(Having Android kill the Dialer/Phone and/or Skype App because the user put the phone in a smart dock, terminating an active phone call to make room for RAM for the Dock application is more than insane. Especially with the only 'keep alive' recourse is the App can keep trying to restart to shove other Apps out of RAM.)

The way v2.2 terminates applications with little regard to priority, or the fact that this happens AT ALL, is insane in the year 2010. Truly how many computer users deal with the OS randomly closing programs without allowing the user or the application to save their state or data? None..

So in v2.3, they made this even worse. Why?

Even with 1gb of RAM on Android, users still deal with memory shortfalls and Android is killing off processes all the time.

They internal fragmentation of Honeycomb and Gingerbread is another head shaking moment. Sure they are promising a unified version, but this isn't working as well as they planned. Microsoft has Windows 8 (NT) running on x86 desktop and ARM phone class tablets/devices already.


This is when people should truly start to get that Android is not a very good OS model, it is a below average JVM, using old JAVA constructs, trying to run on a light Linux kernel, that was never designed to relegated to partially functional.

If Google was going to build a Linux based phone, they should be using the features of Linux that DO work well even with the extra overhead this stack of services adds to the resource consumption. However, they didn't care about Linux, and still don't and want to dump it.

(Linux is poorly layered and not very modular, especially compared to WinCE and Windows NT which is more than just portable and the most modular OS technology in history.)

Google bought stuff that wasn't intended for what they turned into Android, and have been trying to shove a misshapen 10lb pig into a 5lb sack, and not even doing well with putting lipstick on it.

thenetavenger said,

1) I can say that, as Google does not have the level of skill set engineers as the companies they are competing against, Apple and Microsoft. Google has NO experience with OS design, and it shows by the basic fact they had to purchase the JVM and Android technologies, instead of implementing their own.


Just because they buy the existing system doesn't mean they don't' have the skill level to implement their own. Sometime, people don't like to re-invent the wheel. Speaking of which, didn't Microsoft do the same at some point? The thing is they may or may not. But at this point, we are just speculating.

thenetavenger said,

As for the comment about the developers, that was just one day, and if you spend much time on the Google developer forums or interacting with the Android developers, you will find your jaw dropping open if you have any programming or OS engineering background. (Seriously, he was arguing that async programming and parallel programming constructs were synonymous - was just a 'whoops' moment, it was a arrogant rant that a freaking Google Search would have clarified so he didn't look incompetent. Which raises a bigger question, why would this person be on the team and working with things that a CS 101 student could explain to him?

Then again, you are assuming that Google developers don't have good enough knowledge on OS because this one guy you saw on developer forum does not know much about scheduling. He may not be brilliant but he doesn't represent the whole development team. And to be fair, we don't even know what his/her position in the development team.

thenetavenger said,

2) HTC Sense is not a very good example, and kind of crazy that you are using it to defend Android. Here is why...

HTC sense maybe based on their TouchFLO that was original designed for PocketPC/Windows Phone but that doesn't defeat my original purpose which is to say people like having a choice and not to defend Android with HTC Sense. HTC Sense was one example I can think of when I was replying. And, I have seen people that actually prefer HTC over Samsung just because of their sense UI. The same for those that prefer Samsung. It's something to talk about amongst our Android users. And, it is not just UI, Samsung offer market apps that integrated with OS, where you can download a particular game for free.

If WP7 is the same as android, why would Nokia have a deal with Microsoft so that they can customize the OS rather than extending the OS just like HTC or other OEM would? Like I said, it is not just the UI. It's like having a control over the OS so that different OEM can offer the different choices. And, in my OPINION, OEMs like to have that control.

Edited by morrizz, Sep 29 2011, 3:41am :

I believe theres only one carrier that isn't delivering the update and thats Telefonica (Spain).

As for the Samsung issue, well you can't blame Microsoft for that. Samsung shipped two different hardware versions of the "same" phone. That said hopefully MS gets the update for it sorted and shipped asap.

why dont people realize that there is only around 15 hardware for windows phone 7???

Edited by still1, Sep 28 2011, 5:16am :

still1 said,
why dont people realize that there is only around 15 hardware for windows phone 7???

Carriers require changes to the OS as well. It isn't just a matter of tailoring the OS to different hardware...

still1 said,
why dont people realize that there is only around 15 hardware for windows phone 7???

Why is that Microsoft's fault? Google could have put in some minimum specs too, there was nothing stopping them. However they wanted to be as open as possible, and while that's an advantage of Android it goes hand in hand with the update disadvantage.

Thing is Google is at the carriers and OEMs mercy when it comes to updates; since all they do is code the base OS, and then its upto OEMs to customize it, add in the drivers, and release it to carriers (if they want to). And then its upto the carriers to release it to everyone (if they want to).

Microsoft was only at the carriers mercy (which have now resolved with this Mango update since pretty much every carrier is delivering Mango at the same time). It's still not flawless as we saw with the Samsung incident and hopefully that gets resolved.

Microsoft does have another advantage when it comes to device independent OSes. I mean look at Windows...for years now MS have had an OS that works on a billion different hardware configurations.

still1 said,
why dont people realize that there is only around 15 hardware for windows phone 7???

Doesn't matter! Microsoft rolled this out to 99.99% of all devices both in the U.S. and International! Simultaneously!

You can try to downplay it as much as you want, but Microsoft did what Google has not, and most likely, will never be able to do.

/- Razorfold said,

for years now MS have had an OS that works on a billion different hardware configurations.

Really, billion different hardware configurations!

M_Lyons10 said,

Carriers require changes to the OS as well. It isn't just a matter of tailoring the OS to different hardware...


microsoft have strict control over what the carriers could change on their win 7 phone and a not a lot of changes can be done so yeah not that hard.

M_Lyons10 said,

Carriers require changes to the OS as well. It isn't just a matter of tailoring the OS to different hardware...

Carriers are not allowed to change iOS or WP7.