Windows Mobile update

"Consumer or Business, over eighteen million people last year thought Windows Mobile was the right choice for them. (Just bringing things back on topic)" Indeed that is the topic. And the number shows how severely MS is getting beating in its supposed core competency--making software, and operating systems in particular--by some hardware company. I mean, MS could sell 80 million licenses a year instead of those 18 million...

UNIX based? Oh you mean SMTP RFC 821, that ran on UNIX because that was all that could run it back in 1982? Yeah the same one that MS uses now as a transport protocol between AD/Exchange Sites and all of its internet email. Yeah I can see how its a UNIX problem, UNIX must of spawed SMTP. I actually agree that it need to be updated or replaced, much like BIND added DDNS later in its life. The problem is money. No one will adopt a new standard because they want it to to be their own solution, MS and many others are trying to replace it. Then there is a whole market out there combating malware than many of the vendors, Google, Symantec, MS and many others have created and it makes tons of money. I mean the more OneCare makes money what incentive does MS have to increase security to the point its not needed? Meanwhile customers (corporations) are left spending millions on hardware/software to bolt on top of their email systems to filter out the crap. You cant even get big companies to use RDNS for fear no one else is using it on their SMTP gateways and they will loose email. So no I dont agree that UNIX is the cause of the problem. SMTP protocol yes, backed by fighting over who solution should fix the problem.

How come snake doctor escapes lotsa's [sic] parade? Is that just because he is anti MS?

Mike: # Developer Evangelist at Aditi at Microsoft # Program Manager at Aditi at Microsoft All right I get why there is all that silliness going on here and profusion of post from him... For once we had a great article, with admittedly strange allusion to the iphone in the press comment, as the 2 platform don't compete at all in their target audience, and there comes Mike baiting for the fanbois... I guess Jihadist like Warfare.... and spending time on their keyboard !!!

"I don't understand why you guys had to go after him like that." When they can't make a valid point, they attack the oppositions credibility. Just like US politics. Just like Apple.

Snake "Oh you mean SMTP RFC 821, that ran on UNIX because that was all that could run it back in 1982?" You honestly think the only OS around in 1982 was Unix? You've been hanging out with the Linux Fanboi's way, way too much. Perhaps a good history of computers text might be in order... "Yeah the same one that MS uses now as a transport protocol between AD/Exchange Sites and all of its internet email. " The same one EVERYBODY HAS TO USE to be compatible... Hence the problem. (And, yes, it did start out on Unix and there really were other choices at the time.)

"But the nice part of not being anonymous is that I have credibility and they found documentation to prove it." It's never about how much credibility one has, just about putting it down at all costs. The more credibility one has, the higher the reputation one hopes to acquire by putting it down. At least that's what they always hope for. It never works out that way though. (See: Apple)

I think any reasonable person can agree with Paul that Windows Mobile is neither innovative, exciting or even interesting. We can also add to that list that Windows Mobile isn't attractive, stable, easy to develop great applications in, easy to use or snappy. I will balance that by saying that iPhone 2.0 is pretty buggy, the address book in the new update is HORRIBLY slow to load and it, anecdotal, feels like the phone drops more calls. Apple needs to keep the focus on speed and stability here. On the plus side, my iPhone already has more well-designed and useful applications than I've ever seen on Palm or Windows Mobile. And jesus the games look amazing.

"To keep on it they'd have had to have already been on it, and if that were the case, the iPhone 2 wouldn't have the speed and stability issues that are plaguing it." To me John's wording implies that speed and stability have generally been Apple's focus, but not in this case.

"It's never about how much credibility one has, just about putting it down at all costs. The more credibility one has, the higher the reputation one hopes to acquire by putting it down. At least that's what they always hope for." Looking in the mirror again, Wae?

"Difference is that Apple is consistently driven to make their products better, rather then the outright statements of "Bug fixes don't drive apportion" as uttered by Bill Gates." OK. You like Apple and think Microsoft's products suck. Fair enough. That's your opinion. I personally feel Microsoft doesn't get enough credit, but, again, that's my opinion. Why do you feel the need to defend Apple on a Windows focused site, though? Yes, Paul mentions apple on numerous occasions in his posts, but that, according to him, is from a Windows user's perspective. Obviously a lot of you who hate Microsoft and its products will never get it. Why, then do you bother? Do you really believe you can make him change his opinions by attacking everything he says? And this, frankly, is an honest question.

"Wow. almost 10 minutes so far and nobody from the iCabal has commented on how Paul's negative comments on Windows Mobile are somehow an unfair attack on Apple." But in less than 10 minutes we got someone mentioning "iCabal".

LOL @ Mike. You baited a flame war with your very first comment. Bravo sir. Bravo.

"I find it attractive. I really do like the default green them for WM6. It's also plenty stable. " I don't have many 3rd party apps on my Moto Q, except for the DST update, OneNote mobile, and Opera Mobile. The only thing that's not stable on the thing is Opera Mobile. It crashes frequently. AND it's supposed to be the "stable" release (8.whatever it is). I'm hoping that's not what it's like on the Touch Diamond, but I'm pretty confident that HTC wouldn't put up with that kind of shit. It uses a custom version of 9.5 anyway, not the 8.crap that I currently have.

Mike: "Tero, If 18 Million plus per year licenses for the core of a consumer product is getting severely beaten, what do you call a consumer product company that didn't sell 1/3rd that many despite full channel control? I know, you'll call it a breakthrough success. :-)" No, I don't. And I wasn't referring to Apple. Apple is not beating MS in the mobility space--at least, not yet. It may in the future.

Dude: "As to why am here." No. I didn't ask you why you were on this site. That's not for me to say. That's totally upto you (and/or Paul). I meant that you have to understand that these reviews, opinions are written from the perspective of a Windows user. You say Paul is obsessed with Apple. I would agree. In fact, the whole tech world is obsessed with Jobs and Apple. (It reminds me of the "Obama Mia" skit on Jay Leno.) "Paul is fairly well thought out when it comes to something other then the Wii or Apple." So, instead of airing his own opinion, he should simply go with the flow and like each one of Apple's products because a majority of the tech media does? Is that what you're saying? Paul has been highly critical of several Microsoft ventures in the past. Somehow, people ignore that and when he critizes something that comes out of Cupertino, he is labeled a Windows apologist, etc. Yes, he does go overboard with his criticism at times, but that's not just restricted to Apple.

The zest with which Paul writes about Apple is almost unbelievable. However, Microsoft is what he loves; Apple is only what he loves to write about. There's a substantial difference there. I remember the first review by Paul I read, about Windows Me. It was the greatest OS ever released. Every consumer *had* to upgrade to it from 98 SE, no matter how much it blue-screened or how little there was new in it. I thought the guy was nuts. Then I realised he just loved the company that made it. Had the OS been released by, say, Apple, the review would have sent it down the toilet faster you can spell Apple. Of course, later Paul started making fun of these pre-XP consumer Windows versions, just like MS did on its advertisement, admitting they had not been secure or stable. Now he thinks Vista is cool. I wonder what he says of it in a few years' time. Maybe he again discovers that it actually sucked... but that the point just wasn't important to say at the time.

I think Paul is definitely more opinionated than people like Ed Bott, Mary Jo Foley, and Ina Fried. You guys only seem to notice it when he is critical of Apple. Go and read some of his recent comments about Windows Mobile, XBox 360, and even Bill Gates and you might see what I'm talking about ... maybe not.

@Waethorn, "Then they'll make a couple more "major" revisions and update the UI with a couple new effects while charging full price for each upgrade." Oops... except that iPhone 2.0 was a free update. But hey, reality has never gotten in the way of your anti-apple nonsense.

Windows Mobile is definitely in need of a serious revision if the platform is to be taken more seriously. I've seen and played with a few Windows Mobile phones and I was not impressed. Its an okay platform but to business-like. Perhaps like Paul's suggestion of one format for business, one for commercial use, and one thats a superset of both. This way consumer models are bogged down with non-essential applications and service that consumers don't use. Also, the business version should be refined to include things that could be useful. The superset should be in the mold of a much smaller Vista Ultimate edition. As for the ongoing debate about Paul's bias, I'd point out the article on the Visa review titled, "Windows Vista Review Part 7: Where Windows Vista Fails." http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_07.asp Here Paul took Microsoft to the woodshed. It was a scathing damnation of Vista shortfalls and how the corporation had let the consumers down. Even Microsoft took notice of this review. Also Paul's article on the Windows Mobile on the Motorolla Q was pretty straightforward. http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/wm_q.asp All I can expect out of anyone in this life is to be fair but biased. We are all biased to one degree or another. Even if you dislike or don't particularly like a corporation, product, or person; you should be able to step back and look at something objectively. I'd say that Paul does the job pretty well, in my opinion. However, it does seem like if you utter anything mentioning the words A--P-P-L-E, and their's a mob ready to read you the riot act. Objectivity is also subjective to people's beliefs, education, and experiences. I will not damn the man for review Apple products that are used in Windows. Its part of the Windows user experience and he has the right to cover it. I would make this one of my favorite sites, if Paul didn't review those Apple products on Windows that I might potentially use. If you don't like his attitude, thats fine. But thats a part of the man, you can just ignore it. Do I go off on these Apple leaning writers? No. I can't change their minds. No more than anyone can change my mind on what I use for my own computing purposes. I do try to base my opinions in fact and from honest experiences. Thats why I've restrained myself from commenting on Mobile Me, as I have not used the service. My comments were on the perception of the service not actual use. I will refuse to comment specifically on it, till I have actually use said service. That said, I think Paul is pretty fair. Biased? Yes. Fair, definitely. Since he is the subject of many attacks and criticisms many of which we never see, I think he's been pretty fair about the whole thing. I don't know if I could so such restraint. Peace.

http://msmobiles.com/news.php/7542.html Despite claims of Microsoft that "Windows Mobile is also good for consumers", in reality Microsoft failed to appeal to consumers and this claim was not serious but just pure marketing pep-talk as facts proved it: Zune Market place for music still not integrated inside of Windows Mobile, gaming support superficial, and promised new version of Internet Explorer delayed till 2009.

@Waethorn, "Ah, but 3G wasn't" Ah but most people don't even have 3G coverage. My first gen iPhone just sold on ebay to someone in poland for $400. Oh... and do you care to take back your claims about Canadian iPhone demand being non-existent, given the Rogers recent statements about massive demand and commitments to buy $150 million worth of iPhones? I'm going to bet the answer is no. You'll ignore it.

@sharky, I'm not sure I understand what that means. It's not like I build computers for a living (Waethorn) or sell books about Vista (Paul) or provide IT support. How am I advertising?

"@sharky, I'm not sure I understand what that means. It's not like I build computers for a living (Waethorn) or sell books about Vista (Paul) or provide IT support. How am I advertising?" Well, what it means is if Apple ever did an ad for the iPhone that mentioned Windows Mobile, your comment would probably be something like your comment. I don't doubt that the iPhone is a great phone. I've used it myself and liked it. But it does have its share of problems including cracks on the back of the white iPhones. Now, I don't use smartphones and couldn't care less if the iPhone outsold WM phones 5:1. But if Microsoft mentions the iPhone in one press release and it means they're scared to death, what about Apple mentioning Microsoft in all of their keynotes and their ads? "Dont worry about sharky Johnpapola, he went to the Mike Galos (aka Keith) school of logic...ie UNIX is the cause of all internet SPAM:) Maybe they are the same person?" Nope. I frankly have no idea whether or not UNIX has anything to do with internet spam. I don't care either way. And no, I'm not him just like you're not bonch (I hope).

Shark, My point is simply this: when you are the market leader, you don't compare yourself to anyone else. Period. And certainly not a new-comer like the iPhone. But the reality is that Microsoft is not the market leader in mobile and despite WinMo being on version 6.1 and Microsoft pursuing mobile for nearly a decade (or more?)... the iPhone already has them in it's sights. Now, the iPhone is far from perfect and I actually think that 2.0 is slower and buggier than 1.0 right now. They need to fix those bugs ASAP. But they have the superior hardware, software, distribution and developer tools. They have the enthusiasm of developers. These aren't cheerleading statements, they're just facts. And I really do think it's possible to see the OSX Touch platform eclipse Windows Mobile in annual sales very soon. Hell, if Paul Thurrott of the winsupersite even thinks Windows Mobile is "horrible, just awful"... Microsoft has big trouble in mobile. Hence this blatantly defensive press release. They aren't very good at hiding their Apple envy.