this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2023
173 points (95.3% liked)

Technology

59087 readers
3433 users here now

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


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella admits giving up on Windows Phone and mobile was a mistake::Satya Nadella wrote off Microsoft’s Nokia phone business acquisition and now says the company’s exit from mobile was a mistake.

all 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Trimatrix@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I really wanted window 10 phones to take off. Their development into their now defunct projects such as Continuum and Munchkin in my opinion could have jump started and sustained smartphones as a legitimate productivity PC. Imagine having a cellphone you can dock anywhere and have a full blown windows OS to do things on…. That’s where they were heading.

Alas, the best we got is Dex and stage manager both being cellphone OS solutions for work PC tasks.

[–] brenno@lemmy.brennoflavio.com.br 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Canonical also tried this a few years ago with their Ubuntu Touch crowdfunding and failed. Even released some convergent devices but that didn't sell much. My impression is that although the concept is cool it is simply not appealing for the general audience

[–] tsonfeir@lemm.ee -5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

People want software and a functioning phone. Linux, in all its glory, is not for consumers.

The only hope we had was Microsoft, but that’s a joke in itself.

So unless someone wants to try to take on Google, and toss billions at it, it’s just one shitty android form after the other.

[–] scrape@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Android is Linux.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Linux, in all its glory, is not for consumers.

Guess we should tell everyone using Android phones and Chromebooks that their devices aren't actually ready for consumers. Everyone with Steam Decks should get rid of them too.

Should probably also extend that to Unix. Maybe some day MacOS, iOS, PlayStation OS, Nintendo's OS, etc will be ready for consumers

The issue isn't Linux. The issue is that spearheading a new system in a highly competitive market is hard. Microsoft didn't use Linux and they still failed, despite buying a massive well-loved brand and investing several billion

Shit, HTC and LG couldn't stay alive, Sony are a shadow of their former selves in the phone market. And they didn't even have to worry about pushing a whole new software experience.

[–] Adanisi@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Linux on Desktop is fine, because it's had a long time to mature and improve.

The problem is that Linux mobile software is very immature, so it isn't ready for a general audience yet.

[–] RatherBeMTB@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] Petter1@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And why do we need waydroid in order to install android apk on postmarkedOS?

[–] Adanisi@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 year ago

Android does use the Linux kernel, they're right, but the userspace is completely different and what I was referring to.

[–] Adanisi@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 year ago

I was referring to standard GNU/Linux or Busybox/Linux, not the heavily modified Android.

[–] finn_der_mensch@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why are people downvoting ? Yes I love Linux too and all, but be honest. It is not relevant in the mass desktop market. That didn’t make it more easy for Ubuntu touch.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

People are downvoting because it was an ill-informed comment.

The issue isn't Linux. A large majority of phones use Linux, as do many other consumer devices. Saying "Linux isn't for consumers" is extremely daft.

Ubuntu's phone efforts didn't fail because it ran Linux, it failed because almost all phone brands do unless they have Chinese backing.

Microsoft pumped billions into smartphones and failed. Was it because of Linux? No. Windows phone didn't run Linux. So I guess by the above logic, Windows isn't suitable for consumers?

Shit, HTC and LG are big names that died in the phone space despite not having the hard job of creating their own ecosystem. Samsung has walked back on Tizen and a bunch of other in-house stuff and started shifting back to Google services. Sony is only surviving by abandoning the mass market.

[–] tsonfeir@lemm.ee -3 points 1 year ago

Because people like to downvote.

[–] alphapuggle@programming.dev 7 points 1 year ago

Imagine a Lumia with one of these new Snapdragon 8cx cores in it that slides into a lapdock. Plenty of power for like 90% of people

[–] unconsciousvoidling@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Just imagine all that extra data you could scrap for profit. $$$ all that spying and forcing ads into peoples faces … we all really missed out.

[–] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

Microsoft minion when you stand up from your desk: noo, get back, geeet baaack

[–] NoiseColor@startrek.website 4 points 1 year ago

Cynical, but yeah, he probably had that in mind.

[–] Ragerist@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I'm stunned with how bad it was and why they hell they didn't use the same strategy that made Windows popular.. The apps.

My work back then gave me a Windows Phone. Very few of the apps I had on my Android phone was available for my work phone.

On top of that a lot of things simply didn't work. One thing I still remember was that Alarm volume and Ring tone volume could not be adjusted individually.

The whole thing felt like they wanted to reinvent the wheel and started from absolute scratch without learning from the innovation in the past decade of mobile phones.

It's sad, a third competitor in the smartphone space wouldn't have been a bad thing.

[–] foggenbooty@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They did try to do that, but there wasn't enough interest from companies to split their development teams to support a third platform. In fact Microsoft realised this and was so invested in it that they had a program where they would use MS devs to convert/build from scratch your iOS/Android app to run on Windows for free. All you had to do was take it over and maintain it after; almost no one took them up on it.

[–] poopkins@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

One of the clients I worked for had an interesting relationship with both Microsoft and BlackBerry at the time: both companies just outright paid them to build and maintain the Windows Phone and BlackBerry 10 apps, respectfully. Another agency did Windows Phone, but we billed them directly for the BlackBerry port of the Android app and its maintenance.

[–] chakan2@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

The apps.

The industry just wasn't interested. It's too bad, the environment was excellent, and the phone was pretty slick. The HTC Sidekick will always be one of my favorite form factors for a phone.

There just wasn't any interest in supporting a 3rd platform for most major companies.

I worked at a fortune 50 when the phone release and developed an app for it. The company looked at it and said they didn't want to spend 50k to support it over the next year. The whole industry came to the same conclusion. Microsoft had to subsidize the 3rd party apps it got for the phone.

[–] ultratiem@lemmy.ca -2 points 1 year ago

Lmao. Windows became popular because Apple was in shambles. Essentially they were the only game in town and literally because of that, overnight, they became THE operating system. Even with Jobs’ return and Apple’s meteoric rise, they were never able to even dent the monopoly they already built.

And they didn’t stop at personal computers. They innervated every business, post secondary institution, government sector and basically took over.

Microsoft is good at building and maintaining a monopoly. Outside of that, their actually products are third rate at best.

[–] Kushan@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Microsoft should have embraced Android when it was clear that was winning out on the mobile front and shipped its own version of the OS.

Microsoft could have courted OEMs to use their flavour of Android instead by giving them a cut of appstore revenue and enticing developers over by offering sweeter revenue share deals as well. It's all Android, a few shims for Google services and it'd be almost no effort for a developer to put their app on both storefronts and get more revenue as a result.

OEM's don't make money from the play store, only Google does. But no OEM has the clout and ability to draw developers over to run their own store - many have tried and they're a barren wasteland of malware and out of date crapware. You can't ship a device without an AppStore so Google wins and Phones get more expensive as a result.

In a world where the Play store has genuine competition and consumers can move from one device to another with the knowledge that all their favourite apps will still be available, we could have had a much better ecosystem.

It's not too late, either, all Microsoft has to do is step up.

[–] b1tstremist0@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I really liked Surface Duo, atleast its design. Microsoft can actually innovate on that and not end up like LG but they decided to give up.

[–] bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de 6 points 1 year ago

😢

This reminds me of Stephen Elop and how he ruined Nokia and turned them away from Linux so that Microsoft might buy Nokia for cheap.

[–] DingDongBell@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

resurrect it !

[–] chakan2@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Where Microsoft really dropped the ball is their devices didn't run windows apps. The surface RT was a disaster, and the phone wasn't what the average consumer thought of when they thought of Microsoft. It's be a herculean miracle to get a W7 lite x86 phone to run for more than a couple hours, but if they'd taken that approach, it would've changed the game.

Or they could've build a reliable x86 emulator on ARM, but that also would have been an engineering miracle.

[–] LemmyIsFantastic@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago
[–] EnderMB@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Windows Phone was never going to work, but what I would have loved to see is ~~Google~~ Microsoft take on Android and dominate the market. Around that time, Microsoft were putting out some legitimately good hardware, and with some sane choices they could have been in a position now where they released a phone "powered by ChatGPT" and overpowered Google in a market they have been desperate to own for years.

[–] DaPorkchop_@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Did you mean "... see is Microsoft take on Android"? It doesn't really make sense as it is now, Google already owns Android

[–] EnderMB@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Yep, that's what I meant!