“At a press event in New York City yesterday, Microsoft unveiled the first of its much-expected, long-overdue portfolio of smartphones that will run on the company’s new mobile phone operating system,” Sam Diaz reports for ZDNet.
“But whether those devices can make a dent against the competition – notably Google’s Android devices and Apple’s iPhone – is still the big question,” Diaz reports. “Until I’m comfortable knowing that Microsoft has a real contender with Win Phone 7, I’m not sure that I’m willing to go out on a limb with an investment of a two-year service commitment.”
“So far, the reviews have been fairly positive, but much of that could stem from the idea that the expectations were already low,” Diaz reports. “Still, I haven’t really heard of anything that jumps out as a differentiator, as bringing something special to the game.”
Diaz reports, “And that’s what kind of makes me uneasy. Smartphone shoppers are already familiar with iPhone and Android and, without something to set Microsoft apart, I can’t see it shifting the tide in the short-term.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Again, if Apple is adding many new carriers around the world and going to multiple carriers in the U.S., Germany, and elsewhere, then the leftovers that Google, RIM, Nokia, Microsoft, etc. are fighting for in the iPhone wannabe market will amount to nothing more than a few crumbs.
iCal me: The imminent failure of this product will be the last straw for Ballmer. It will unravel his political cover in the board of directors.
iCal me: The imminent failure of this product will be the last straw for Ballmer. It will unravel his political cover in the board of directors.
Is this a real question?
Is this a real question?
@MDN, the title of the article is “Is Microsoft’s WinPhone 7 worthy of the two-year commitment?” which is different from the title posted here “Is Microsoft’s Windows Phone ‘07 worthy of the two-year commitment?”.
Yes, it is the stupidest name for an OS ever, and it looks way too little way too late. However, it is a little dishonest of you to use “’07” as if it was designed in 2007 (which it DOES look like), and then ask if it is worth a 2 year commitment.
It is not worth the two year commitment, and it is behind, but it is NOT called “Windows Phone ‘07”
@MDN, the title of the article is “Is Microsoft’s WinPhone 7 worthy of the two-year commitment?” which is different from the title posted here “Is Microsoft’s Windows Phone ‘07 worthy of the two-year commitment?”.
Yes, it is the stupidest name for an OS ever, and it looks way too little way too late. However, it is a little dishonest of you to use “’07” as if it was designed in 2007 (which it DOES look like), and then ask if it is worth a 2 year commitment.
It is not worth the two year commitment, and it is behind, but it is NOT called “Windows Phone ‘07”
If today’s Windows phone 7 had been released in 2007 before Apple’s iPhone debut, it would still be in 4th place today. iCal me.
It’s a bitch trying to copy Apple when you release the product before Apple does.
If today’s Windows phone 7 had been released in 2007 before Apple’s iPhone debut, it would still be in 4th place today. iCal me.
It’s a bitch trying to copy Apple when you release the product before Apple does.
I’m so excited, I’m going to inquire about a 4 year family deal
I’m so excited, I’m going to inquire about a 4 year family deal
MS needs to offer the phone with a two year money-back guarantee instead of a two-year lock in. Then they might sell a few dozen (more with buy-one-get-more offers)
MS needs to offer the phone with a two year money-back guarantee instead of a two-year lock in. Then they might sell a few dozen (more with buy-one-get-more offers)
Answer is: No!!!!! No way! Don’t do it!!!!!
Buy AAPL stocks as it will go Up higher to $401:-)
Answer is: No!!!!! No way! Don’t do it!!!!!
Buy AAPL stocks as it will go Up higher to $401:-)
I’m going to smash my iPhone the day my new win7 phone arrives.
I’m going to smash my iPhone the day my new win7 phone arrives.
@drbacon
Wow, you are really sharp, Did you pick that one up all by yourself?
@drbacon
Wow, you are really sharp, Did you pick that one up all by yourself?
> Windows Phone ‘07
Good one MDN. Microsoft seems to be copying iPhone OS 1.0 from 2007, so “Windows Phone ‘07” is quite appropriate.
> Windows Phone ‘07
Good one MDN. Microsoft seems to be copying iPhone OS 1.0 from 2007, so “Windows Phone ‘07” is quite appropriate.
Even if Microsoft wins back some piddly market share from Android, RIM or Nokia, how the heck are they going to make any money on this? Google gets search on Android devices, RIM and Nokia make their own equipment. I don’t see these device makers willing to license Windows software for more than a couple pennies since Android is free. I’m actually willing to bet Microsoft paid these schmucks to make phones for them in a desperate attempt to get a date to the prom that is the smartphone business where the iPhone is the King AND Queen. Sounds to me that Microsoft is willing to sink billions of dollars into this with the hope of trying to win market share then pulling a bait and switch on the device manufacturers by trying to license the software, which on second thought might work if Android makers get sued and have to start paying a fee as well.
Even if Microsoft wins back some piddly market share from Android, RIM or Nokia, how the heck are they going to make any money on this? Google gets search on Android devices, RIM and Nokia make their own equipment. I don’t see these device makers willing to license Windows software for more than a couple pennies since Android is free. I’m actually willing to bet Microsoft paid these schmucks to make phones for them in a desperate attempt to get a date to the prom that is the smartphone business where the iPhone is the King AND Queen. Sounds to me that Microsoft is willing to sink billions of dollars into this with the hope of trying to win market share then pulling a bait and switch on the device manufacturers by trying to license the software, which on second thought might work if Android makers get sued and have to start paying a fee as well.
Hey Monkey Boy, u cannot Rip off other Company’s IP’s Like u did in the 80’s with Impunity Anymore, So no wonder u Could not even Implement the Cut & Paste on that TURD, u Call (Windoze Phone 7) because u knew that Apple would take u to the Cleaners, and u can not Resort to your old ways of Bribing the OEM’s Because Guess What, “Google is giving away Android for free” May u Remain at the Helm of that Sorry Ass Company 4 as long as it Takes.
Hey Monkey Boy, u cannot Rip off other Company’s IP’s Like u did in the 80’s with Impunity Anymore, So no wonder u Could not even Implement the Cut & Paste on that TURD, u Call (Windoze Phone 7) because u knew that Apple would take u to the Cleaners, and u can not Resort to your old ways of Bribing the OEM’s Because Guess What, “Google is giving away Android for free” May u Remain at the Helm of that Sorry Ass Company 4 as long as it Takes.
@drbacon
This is a reference to a previous article that said a particular feature(s) of the Win Phone 7 OS made then think it was really and ’07 OS.
The OS may be decent, but just like Android, the carrier can put their crap on top and not all hardware is going to support all the OS features. That means that it is difficult to make a blanket statement about whether either are worthy of a 2yr contract commitment since the carrier (only with respect to what shit they pile on top of the OS and if/what ways they hinder features) and hardware both are critical for the quality.