Microsoft is at it again: Killing Windows Phone features we love; This time: Rooms

[nosense]

A responsible CEO won't do that. 

No, that's Joe Belfiore\Terry Myerson job.

[HawkMan]

rooms was a solution without a problem, and without users. and as long as windows phone doesn't have 100% market share they need more universal solutions.

[Ian S.]

never heard of it before

I have, but only because I use Windows Phone, otherwise I have not seen it advertised, nor have I ever used the feature as we just group text.

[articuno1au]

Yeah, a platform specific feature that was next to unusable by people who don't use WP getting killed off in place of a Skype service that will be available across platforms so that everyone can use it. Not only driving the uptake of the service but also increasing it's usefulness.

 

Also, Rooms adoption rate was tiny, so it's hardly surprising to see it getting culled.

 

Way to speak for the greater WP using community though..

[Meko Mimi]

No, that's Joe Belfiore\Terry Myerson job.

But it would still the CEO has the power to approve it, right?

[spenser.d]

But it would still the CEO has the power to approve it, right?

Only if you think then CEO of a company like ms has the time to micromanage everything (hint, he doesn't). That's why you hire VPs and other execs and trust them to make good decisions.

[CtrlShift]

This is why it's being removed.

 

it's bloat that's not being used. kind of like the old htc footprints crap they kept around forever.

 

One drive supports sharing anyway so...

 

Rooms is a useful feature and I hardly think it could be called 'bloat'.  It was simply a built-in content aggregator which could be easily shared with your existing contacts.  When I think of bloatware, I think of marketing-driven, duplicated, often performance hogging software, none of which Rooms could be described as IMHO.

[HawkMan]

It's bloat when it's not used and takes up resources. 

[deck]

Rooms was a neat idea that failed simply because Windows phone has no market penetration.  3% share is not enough to START a feature like this.  

 

I would like to use Rooms.  I am the only person I know who uses Windows Phone (and Surface, for that matter).  So for me the feature was useless;  I never had a chance to even try it simply because nobody uses the same platform as me.

 

Meanwhile, I envy my iPhone and Android friends because they have all of these social features.  (I prefer Windows, but the appeal of the other platforms - for me - comes with more people using them and being able to take advantage of the social features that can only exist with a strong user base.)

[theyarecomingforyou]

Rooms was a neat idea that failed simply because Windows phone has no market penetration.  3% share is not enough to START a feature like this.

Exactly. If only 5% of the WP user base utilised the feature that represents 0.15% of the smartphone market. Given that it requires WP that immediately limits the appeal (I don't know anyone who owns a WP device). It clearly wasn't a selling point of the platform, as even WP users hadn't heard of it. The first time I heard about it was this announcement that it's being axed.

[HawkMan]

Rooms was a neat idea that failed simply because Windows phone has no market penetration.  3% share is not enough to START a feature like this.  

 

I would like to use Rooms.  I am the only person I know who uses Windows Phone (and Surface, for that matter).  So for me the feature was useless;  I never had a chance to even try it simply because nobody uses the same platform as me.

 

Meanwhile, I envy my iPhone and Android friends because they have all of these social features.  (I prefer Windows, but the appeal of the other platforms - for me - comes with more people using them and being able to take advantage of the social features that can only exist with a strong user base.)

 

Problem is, even with 50% marketshare, you couldn't release rooms as a platform feature. imagine how much more successful apple only stuff like facetime would be if it wasn't locked to Apple only. how many apple users end up using alternatives because many or even just a few of their contacts can't use it.

[Dashel]

Its an aggregator though, not a lock-in like facetime.  As noted, the resources can be accessed from any platform...it was just better on WP. (Backgrounds, ease of access etc).  Much like the change to the People app, its made users that weren't interested in 'apps' much more app centric.  It sucks.

[HawkMan]

Its an aggregator though, not a lock-in like facetime.  As noted, the resources can be accessed from any platform...it was just better on WP. (Backgrounds, ease of access etc).  Much like the change to the People app, its made users that weren't interested in 'apps' much more app centric.  It sucks.

 

well, not really, yeah, you can still access the pictures as they are just one drive files. you don't need rooms to upload and share to one drive, so by that logic you agree it was unnecessary. rooms was more than that though like groups and chat. which won't be accessible.

 

either way it was unused, partly because it only existed on one platform. though I doubt it solved a problem big enough that people would have bothered had it been multi platform

[jakem1]

As I understand it not much is being lost.  I set up a Room for my family with a shared calendar and shared a couple of photos.  The calendar sharing is standard Hotmail/Outlook.com functionality and the photo sharing is standard OneDrive functionality.  None of that is lost.

 

Rooms simplified all this sharing across services but it was hidden away in the People hub.  I'm not surprised so many people haven't heard of it.