Nadella, Gates, and Ballmer have all admitted to Microsoft’s mobile mistakes.

137 points

There’s nothing stopping Microsoft from coming out with a new phone line, other than poor management.

permalink
report
reply
89 points

Replace “new phone line” with pretty much anything ‘positive’ and it fits Microsoft.

Better OS? Nope! Shit management. Better productivity software? Nope! Shit management. Better cloud and virtualization platform? Nope! Shit management.

The first day I used Windows 8 RC, I was flabbergasted that anyone approved that dumpster fire for release. They’ve been trying to unfuck that ever since, and at dead snail’s pace. Thanks, shit management! You’re why I left systems administration to be a bad programmer!

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

What do you program in? Ive really enjoyed the new .NET ecosystem, but I’m sure it’ll go to shit eventually just like the rest of their products…

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

That’s the irony! Mainly working in C# .NET (and some SSIS) and maintaining an unfair amount of legacy VB on ETL processes.

FWIW I was working in Java on the middle-end of Oracle for a few years before changing positions to where I am.

But at least I’m never on-call!

permalink
report
parent
reply
37 points

For real. AOSP is open source, and Google is taking more things private. MS could start driving AOSP since FOSS projects go where the group contributing the most wants it to go.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

That would force them to adopt different languages internally though. I don’t know what they are doing these days, but something tells me it’s not kotlin and jetpack.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

What about Windows subsystem for Android?

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/android/wsa/

It gives developer options where you can sideload unsigned apk files.

I mean, they’ve at least made inroads with Android, it’s not impossible to consider them making moves in the area.

It sure seems like they still do love their Embrace, Extend, Extinguish strategy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

They’re already talking up .NET MAUI. Their cross-platform C# application UI.

I’m also not sure MS cares that much if that gets them in the game.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That’s really not a big barrier. Just add a couple folks with experience in the desired tech and any good dev team will continue to be a good dev team, even if everything changed under them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I wish this can be true but that’s bow how trillion dollar companies work. There’s lot of redtape involved. Think of it as one drug dealer is not allowed to deal drugs on other dealers turf. But something tell me if we start praising elon , probably he’ll take the bait and might drive aosp away from google but I also fear he might burn the whole thing down to the ground lol

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points
*

It’s not that easy on the hardware side. Keep in mind that the way both Google and Microsoft previously entered this market was by buying an established manufacturer (Motorola and Nokia, respectively). But Microsoft squandered Nokia’s manufacturing assets and would need to either start from scratch or acquire somebody else. But there aren’t many manufacturers left that are decent, non-Chinese, and willing to sell.

There’s also the option to pair with a manufacturer and ask them to put Microsoft’s OS on their phones, but Google would most likely lean on anybody attempting that and threaten to revoke their access to Android trademark and Google Services. Samsung is the only manufacturer in a position to tell them to suck it but they’re locked into a complex struggle with Google and it’s anybody’s guess if taking Microsoft on board would help or hinder their position.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The appeal of the “we could have been a contender” fantasy for Microsoft is the idea that they’d be printing money by collecting the 30% tax on apps and in-app purchases. If they were 100% dependent on Samsung, they’d be printing at least 50% less money

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Microsoft does make phones - the Surface Duo line. Unfortunately it’s really not comparable to other phones in the same price range.

permalink
report
parent
reply
98 points

Windows Phone failed because there were no apps for it. There was no YouTube app, no Facebook app, no Twitter app, etc until very late or never at all. They should have just paid developers to make the apps so that people would buy the phones. The OS was great and worked on a wide range of hardware. It could have been a great enterprise solution and they seemed to be heading that direction but the lack of third party made it little more than A Microsoft feature phone.

permalink
report
reply
30 points

They literally couldn’t pay the devs. Netflix for instance flat out refused to have blackberry pay for 2 full time devs to maintain an app.

Netflix looked at the market share and determined that there was 0 benefit. The people that were on blackberry devices already had a Netflix account.

Additionally Blackberry store apps were compelling for devs. Dev feedback included ease of development and more importantly they made a lot more money on the blackberry store than on iOS/android, both because the cut was better and they could jack the prices up because the customers were not nearly as frugal.

To get into mobile would require a massive overhaul of windows apps to get them mobile-friendly

Oh look, that’s exactly what they did and now we have PWAs for lots of apps. Maybe MS is getting ready to take a stab at mobile again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Netflix have a different relationship with Microsoft than they did with Blackberry, MS would have had much more clout.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points
*

Actually, the main cause it failed was because Microsoft bullied the manufacturers until they said enough and bailed out. So they were forced to buy a manufacturer to keep going (Nokia) then gave up halfway through after buying it.

Microsoft has stupid amounts of cash and could have kept Windows Phone going indefinitely, even at a loss. It’s how they broke into the console market, by keeping the Xbox going at a loss for a decade.

Yeah the lack of apps would have been a problem initially but everybody would have relented given enough time, and in the meantime most of the missing services could have been accessed in a browser.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

They couldn’t even be bothered developing their own apps for it. The mail app began to lag behind Outlook on Android, Minecraft was never ported to it when it could have been a killer exclusive app.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Google was often guilty of that too. I remember a number of Android apps that were pretty far behind the iOS ones. I don’t think that is the case anymore though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

There were also a bunch of iOS apps behind Android ones. Remember when iOS finally got widgets? Different companies focused on different functionality first. But at this point, android and iOS have had the time to play catch-up with each other.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

That reminded me when the Remote Desktop app turned up on Android before the Windows Phone. Ludicrous.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I knew it would be this before it loaded and I am happy to be reminded of it. Baller was such a weirdo.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Holy fuck he looks like he’d been on a cocaine binge for days.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Oh my word, why have I never seen this before?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

Developers

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

This was the downfall of BlackBerry as well.

QNX-based BB10 OS was phenomenal, and their hardware was top notch.

It was the lacking app ecosystem that killed it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

You need to read up on the fall of Blackberry. It was extremely badly mismanaged. It wasn’t the lack of apps that killed them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I was a BB developer right around the time of their demise. It never mattered how good or bad their OS was, because the development environment for BB was complete shit - which was a big part of why nobody wrote apps for it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

They should have just paid developers to make the apps so that people would buy the phones.

Blackberry at their end (circa 2011 or so) started handing out $10,000 grants to developers to make apps for them. I thought about applying for one, but $10K is not much at all to develop a decently-featured app that does anything, and BB’s development environment was such an unbelievable clusterfuck that really no amount of money could have made worthwhile to endure.

Also: 16-bit color lol.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

16-bit color

What the fuck?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

5 bits each for red and blue and 6 for green. Who needs more than that?

The only reason I liked it at all was that I created a lot of owner-drawn controls (since the built-in Blackberry “fields” were shit) that used a lot of bitmap memory for animation, and reducing your memory footprint by a factor of two (compared to 32-bit graphics) wasn’t worthless, especially for the older devices.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That is because every single mobile version of Windows was incompatible (After version 6) with the previous. They kept reinventing the wheel over and over again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Snapchat was the big one missing that really put the nail in the coffin towards the end there.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I really miss the OS… My favorite phones at the time

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

They totally did that

The problem was that people weren’t really interested in any of it.

The UI was cluttered and messy to look at, none of it was as polished or natural to use as iOS or Android.

Plus there was no Google Maps, no Google Docs (and Office 365 wasn’t around to replace it), even that apps that were in the store felt pretty bad quality. I had Spotify on my iPhone and it was nearly flawless, when I switched to Windows Phone it kept cutting out or crashing or disconnecting from the mobile connection, it just wasn’t fully baked.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Yep, if you don’t even have the stuff the first iPhone came with, your platform isn’t going to make it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

The first iPhone didn’t come with those things. There wasn’t even an App Store until a year and a half after it came out. The first gen was pretty much crap. It didn’t have 3g when other phones of the time did. It had the best browser but it was slow as shit. The whole page would turn gray when you scrolled around. There was no copy/paste. You couldn’t sync with Exchange. It was missing basic features that other phones of the time had. It was probably the 3GS or the 4 when it got really good.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It did have YouTube and maps.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The first iPhone didn’t have anything. In terms of features it was laughable and it could barely be considered a smartphone. It succeeded because it was a phone on a touch screen that worked better than any previous attempt at touch screens.

Everything that made iPhone relevant against Android only came out later. Apple had a large quick start on hardware and UX, Android had a large quick start on the feature set. They both worked to close the gap and now we have two very similar products.

Microsoft didn’t have that gap with Android on the OS level in any way. It could do everything. But they didn’t have apps, because the devs didn’t want a third OS to exist. Devs who just wanted to expand their customer base were making apps for wp just fine. Companies who wanted to manipulate the market into what was more convenient for them did not. Regular folks were making apps to get YouTube, Snapchat, Instagram and that sort of stuff working on wp just fine - someone even made a Pokémon Go client that actually worked on windows phone, but the companies behind those platforms actively wanted those apps to not exist in any way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
69 points

Serves them right for what they did to Nokia.

permalink
report
reply
24 points

Maemo and Meego were so good

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points
*

Yes, they were. These bastards destroyed the biggest European tech company for nothing. And Nokia had all the services required and the technical know-how to rival Google.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

All credit to Microsoft, but as an ex Nokian my feeling is that Nokia killed itself unwittingly when it bought NavTeq. Because of that sunk cost, they were unwilling to adopt Android as it would invalidate the acquisition, with the leaders responsible still at the reins. Life with Android would be far from the heyday of the past, but living is living.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I mourn that loss whenever I remember about it

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Too be fair, it was a big bet and at that point it was Nokia’s only chance of remaining at the top. It they had used android at that point in time, they would have started from the bottom in the race for the android domination that was already seeing some large companies fail. Going with Android that late would at best turn them into another Sony Ericsson unless they executed everything perfectly (which wouldn’t happen with the large amount of in-fighting the company had). Going with Windows Phone would be all or nothing. Only time showed it ended up being nothing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
59 points
*

I’m not a Microsoft fan, in fact I think of windows the same way I would an abusive Ex, but there NEEDS To be more competition in the mobile space

permalink
report
reply
16 points

yeah, more competition - not another gigantic conglomerate that wants to integrate my phone into my operating system.

more competition would be great, another google/apple type - meh.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

Unfortunately only a ‘gigantic conglomerate’ stands a chance against Google and Apple. The other smartphone OSs - Ubuntu, Manjaro etc. - have a tiny market share.

Just look at how Firefox OS struggled even in developing countries, where it could run much better than Android in low-end smartphones. Then Reliance (a big and very cut-throat company) licenced it and now it has a decent marketshare in India. There are plenty of good alternative OSs, but without a big war chest they aren’t getting mainstream acceptance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Fair enough, what I really want is the ability to have a proper, functional, linux distro on my phone

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

I’m hoping the slow creep of right to repair laws will help with this. Forcing manufacturers to provide spare parts, documentation and diagnostic tools to independent shops I think will inevitably lead to more open devices in general.

There would already be a vibrant community of smartphone Linux distros right now if bootloaders were unlocked and manufacturers were more forthcoming with documentation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

one day… they’re certainly powerful enough these days.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I think there is more room with another Android based OS akin to FireOS, a fully Microsoft version of Android, with their desig language over top of what wouldn’t need porting outside of Google based dependencies.

permalink
report
parent
reply
55 points
*

By the time he was CEO it was already dead. He was right to kill it.

I have my doubts that a three-horse phone race would have been stable in the first place, as one of those three (Android, iPhone was too established) would have likely fallen out of favor. And then, you all would be complaining about monopolistic practices Microsoft would inevitably be doing.

Google is not a good company, but they have treated Android much better than they could be.

permalink
report
reply
11 points

Had Microsoft succeeded, things could have ended up the same as the pc market, with windows being used by big brands and Android being used by companies like 2011 Xiami, making highly customized experiences and that sort.

They say Microsoft lost Samsung to Android by being one month too late. Had they finished that first windows phone one month earlier, everything would probably be different today.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 18K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 505K

    Comments