SuperSite Blog

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.

Funny how MS only addresses Apple as its competitor when the reason for its not selling more licenses is elsewhere. Consider:

"Windows Mobile sold more than 18 million licenses in fiscal year 2008"

If I remember correctly, Nokia sells on average more Symbian-S60 devices and licenses in a single quarter. MS's direct competitor, RIM, is growing fast globally, too.

I wonder if people who buy iPhones even consider Windows Mobile in the first place. They are aimed at different segments anyway. iPhone resides in the consumer segment, while Windows Mobile is an enterprise-oriented solution.

Why does MS boast about their selling more Windows Mobiles than Apple sells iPhones? Why is this relevant? Or are they simply trying to sugar-coat their years-long failure in the mobile phone space by diverting people's attention to irrelevant matters such that it looks as if they were actually successful...

Wow. WinJihadist Mike is the first to attempt to turn the attention from Microsoft's failure to meet its own sales target and its continuing less-than-stellar performance in this area by setting up a straw man.

@Tero

Interesting point.  I think Windows Mobile aims to be as much a consumer device as it does an enterprise device.  If you go to the official WM website you will see that most of the pages are dominated with personalization stuff, media stuff, and the like.  Of course business users done care about those things, but MSFT wants to push Windows Mobile further into the consumer segment.  Do I think they can be successful at this?  Well, they are directly competing with the iPhone in that pursuit and the iPhone is quite a bit more impressive to put it lightly.  You are right to say they should be more focused on RIM.

Maybe this is another area to apply Paul's 2 SKU theory for Windows.  Maybe there should be the extremely business oriented version of Windows Mobile to put on your Blackjack or Moto Q, and then a new fun and personal version (maybe tied in with the zune)  on a single piece of new hardware in iPhone fashion.

The good part is that competition will force Microsoft to make Windows Mobile better, fix the start menu centric-interface and so on.  This is a good thing as I'm not much of a fan of the current version.  

Well, that didn't take long...

Now, to point out what all of you seem to have missed in your "They're picking on the Jesus Phone" whines...

The iPhone is mentioned in only 1 paragraph and that was citing an IDC report.

Paul's comments never mentioned the iPhone.

RIM was mentioned in 1 bullet.

Nothing else even mentions competitors.

Odd that you all seem to think this is an attack on Apple.

Here a question for your Mike, only talking MS products now, IF Exchange Server did not exist how may WM licenses do you think they would sell?

I am thinking no many.  Considerably less than any other vendor.

WM blows chunks, always has but....it works great and was the only thing that worked great with Exchange until now.

Snake,

Who knows. If LCDs didn't exist, how many smartphones would exist? It exists and people love Exchange integration on their Windows Mobile phones. Even Apple had to license it (and pathetically call it ActiveStink on stage)

Of course, for a product that you think "blows chunks" Windows Mobile went from 11M to 18M sales in the past year. That's a 64% growth rate (since Apple fans keep saying how year over year growth rate is all that matters)  in the same year they gained a very visible "competitor" (I use quotes since people here keep saying that WM and iPhone don't compete - but only when faced with WM sales numbers)

Yep you missed the point completely.  You brought up iCabal or whatever its called.  MS should not have even mention the iPhone...at all.  BB yes.  WM is by far a business product and the iPhone is by far a consumer product.

My point is this, Windows Mobile has success because it is the best mobile OS for Exchange or was until the iPhone 2.0 firmware 20 days ago or whatever.  Exchange is very popular in the business world and WM compared to BB is free as in you dont need to buy a BES server and CAL's for you BB clients, since WM connects to your OWA server that you already have.

So people want WM access to Exchange data, IT budgets like WM over BB because of the much lower cost, Exchange is used by something like 70% of corporations so......WM is going to automatically going to generate sales, lots of them, especially since Exchange has sold over 100million licenses.

That said, as a long time Exchange administrator, most people HATE, WM, it locks up, it never closes applications, it gets put on many underpowered phones.

Also remember that Microsoft bought that cell phone company that makes the sidekick. This happen right after the iPhone first came out and windows mobile 7 is looking really good if they made their own zune phone. Also windows mobile has many companies developing devices and htc right now is doing great at it. Windows mobile  is also very flexible it is really easy to create apps for it since it uses similar code/tools to windows.

We can all go back and fort on iPhone VS WM Vs Android VS... but we wont know until the next generation phones come out in the end of 2009/2010. I think it could go either way.

Snake, you are wasting your breath here:

www.linkedin.com/.../mikegalos

As if he is going to be anything but biased.

Dude

So what did I say that was biased?

Really. Back up your attacks or don't bother.

Snake

Windows Mobile doesn't separate "Business" and "Consumer" phones and, apparently, neither do Apple or RIM based on Apple's enterprise push or RIM's consumer advertising.

If Microsoft hadn't mentioned iPhone at all, the response would almost certainly have been, "Microsoft's afraid to mention the iPhone. Guess Apple's really hurting them." Given all the press that Apple's product has generated, not mentioning it would have been the story had Microsoft gone that way.

"This happen right after the iPhone first came out and windows mobile 7 is looking really good if they made their own zune phone."

A Zune phone would be a guaranteed failure just like the Zune. Just like Vista, you're going to have a perception problem with the brand name "Zune" when winning over consumers to buy the product.

"As if he is going to be anything but biased."

Cool so now Mike can be referred to as the resident Bill O' Reilly of the SuperSite Blog.

DarkSages,

A small correction. Microsoft bought the company that makes the software used on the Sidekick, not a phone company or the hardware company that makes it.

As for developing apps, absolutely. You don't get 18,000 applications for a phone without a good SDK. And that's certainly a low number. I've written several for either personal or limited use and I know quite a few other developers who have written WM apps that were never meant for commercial or corporate distribution. It's just easy to do if you already know .NET programming.

As for the 2009/10 timeframe. I'd agree that will be an interesting time in this segment of the industry. The growth phase has barely started.

SacredCow

Comparing me to Bill Orally is fighting words.

Mike-

Attack? Hardly. I am merely pointing out that based on your work history you are hardly going to be overly crtical or negative about Apple and rarely critical about anything MS related.

And in all actuality I'm fine with that. Why you ask?  Because you don't feign to be a fan of Apple unlike a certain someone whose name graces this "Windows Supersite", but is anything but.

Think back to your MS days, despite what  I'm sure will be a firm denial its apparent that MS is/has been/always will be focused on what is coming out of 1 Infinite Loop. Witness Ballmer's latest email to the troops at Redmond for proof. For a company that is 3.5% of the WW marketshare, MS sure seems to obsessive about them, and Google, but that is another issue altogether.

And SacredCow is kinda right in his analysis. This blog and your commentary has indeed made this the "Fox News" of the IT blog-o'sphere. Which again is fine when put into context, but in a way reminds me of why I'm not fond of either political party and find Fox News skewed despite their protestations to the contrary, much like this blog, but I digress into the political banter.

And lastly asking for the Apple partisans to chime in. Troll much? You'll find that many people here read the non-apple threads (of which there are less and less) and do not comment on them. Its the taking Apple to task (often unfairly) or with inane or hyperbolic statements that causes the comments.

Lastly, is this your blog now? Could have sworn it had Paul's name on it...

Dude,

btw: thanks for reminding me that I hadn't updated my LinkedIn profile in a while.

HOLY MS FANGIRL that linked in profile was hilarious!!!!  Never use your real name in a blog.

Wow just wow!  I think Weelittleonhorn is really an alias for Mike:)

More like the Keith Olbermann with his zealous for MS!

Dude,

Thinking back to my Microsoft employee days (and that was a while ago), for most of it, Apple was both a major competitor and a major partner. That's often the way it is in this industry.

Personally, I wish that Macintosh was more of a serious competitor and the fact that they've been stagnant at around the 3% mark for over a decade is something I personally find sad. The fact that they've given up on doing their own OS and have fallen back on using Unix is something I find actually tragic. Personally, I wish they were back to innovating in the computing field rather than focusing on chic consumer electronics. It was good for the industry.

The reason I've been posting here has been the mind numbing proliferation of fact-free posts (now there's your FOX analogue) bashing Vista and Microsoft. You'll note that I don't tend to reply without facts and I do my homework first. I do tend to point out when the anti-Microsoft partisans use different rules for products and people they like versus ones they've decided to dislike. I also tend to post when people post opinions as fact or post things as fact that are flat out wrong. I wouldn't call that biased. I'd call that keeping the discussion honest.

"HOLY MS FANGIRL that linked in profile was hilarious!!!!  Never use your real name in a blog.

Wow just wow!  I think Weelittleonhorn is really an alias for Mike:)

More like the Keith Olbermann with his zealous for MS!"

I guess when you have no valid argument, you use every little piece of information that you get from the internet, eh? Sad.

Snake

I always use my real name precisely because I don't think ignorance helps a discussion.

The fact that I have a few decades playing a serious role in the heart of this industry is hardly something I'd want to hide and might help people know both where I'm coming from and what expertise I bring to the discussion.

Now, as for comparing me to Keith Olbermann, that I'll take as high praise, indeed.

Paul,

"Still, I have a hard time embracing Windows Mobile as an innovative, exciting, or even interesting platform"

I'll take Windows Mobile over that stupid iPhone any day.

JamesNT

Your just like him, why not be happy with the Keith resemblance.

I am not a fan of Bill O hardly at all, think he loves him self a bit to much, but the few times I have actually watched his show, he is the closest thing that network has to "Fair and Balanced", not close at all really but he at least he invites people on his show that I know he cant stand, talks to them nicely, polite, with tact and lets them talk.  Even thanks them for being "brave" for coming on his show.

Keith on the other hand (while I agree with 98% of his message) is a first class in, your face Jack @r$$e.  He lives to put people down to the point....his points are muted.  He cant shut up about Bill O, daily almost, yet Bill O (from what I have seen) never says anything about him.  Only guests I see on Keiths show are politicians that totally agree with him, or Hollywood talking idiots that help him put down Bill O and crowd.....so mature.  Maybe that is why Bil Ol is killing him in raitings.

So Keith I have no problem with posting your work history on the net, be free with it.  I mean it was already totally obvious you were MS biased to the bone, coming into every conversation with a THANG for putting down Apple, lots of times when it does not fit into the conversation (see post 1 of this thread) this just helps us with any smidgen of doubt we may have had.

Peace Keith.....Paul, MS and MSNBC has got your back.

@JamesNT

I guess I'm unsure as to why thurrott doesn't like WinMobile.

I will admit when I bough an old WM device running WinMobile2003, I thought it was just plain awful. At best I managed to put a Millipede clone on it for kicks.

However I recently bought a Pocket PC with WM6 and I have been really impressed with it. Yeah it needed a better task manager, which was an easy freeware download for me, but it has really been a nice device and OS to have.

Having hundreds of thousands of programs, and the ability to customize the heck out of it, doesn't hurt either.

I guess I need a better idea of what he thinks "innovative, exciting, or even interesting platform" entails.

JamesNT  said:

Paul,

"Still, I have a hard time embracing Windows Mobile as an innovative, exciting, or even interesting platform"

I'll take Windows Mobile over that stupid iPhone any day.

JamesNT

However if MS came up the iPhone with Angels would be singing and world peace would follow soon thereafter...

My contentions is that Paul wishes for the same thing; An Apple iPhone experience sans the Apple logo. And as soon as one comes close, look out.

You'll take  WinMo over the iPhone? Previously I was considering the Blackjack until I saw what it was running on, then ran away from it as fast as I could. You can put lipstick on a pig... its still a pig which is all WM 6 is.

Mike you keep harping on UNIX as if its a bad thing. Backbone of the intrawebs and all, pretty much says it all.

"MS should not have even mention the iPhone...at all.  BB yes.  WM is by far a business product and the iPhone is by far a consumer product. "

Very good argument ... except that devices like HTC Diamond are actually consumer devices.So, Microsoft mentioning Apple once in the paragraph is just as relevant as your beloved Mac ads.

"Comparing me to Bill Orally is fighting words."

He didn't compare you orally. He compared you in writing.

Sheesh...

;-)

Yeah so many consumers are waiting in line for the HTC Diamond.  I bet there will be a line forming what 10....15 seconds before it goes on sale?

"However if MS came up the iPhone with Angels would be singing and world peace would follow soon thereafter..."

The good thing about Apple is that they get people to want stuff that no one really needs. Of course, they're helped by their army of journalists like Pogue and Goatberg.

If Microsoft had come up with a product like the iPhone, it would have been universally panned and a big failure.

"Yeah so many consumers are waiting in line for the HTC Diamond.  I bet there will be a line forming what 10....15 seconds before it goes on sale?"

Wait. How does that help your argument that the iPhone doesn't compete with Windows Mobile?

I guess it's hard for you to say you were wrong without being snarky.

Dude

Unix was a good idea for a teletype and serial communication world at AT&T in 1970. But that's eons ago in computer terms and the underpinnings (null termination, ipc via sequential serial character streams, etc) are something that holds back the industry. Yes, a modern Unix has new stuff on top of that but the core is too old to justify itself and everything has to work with that crufty core.

As for "backbone of the interwebs and all that", it also explains why we still have spam. The old protocols weren't built for this kind of world and maintaining compatibility with those old protocols (the are "STANDARDS" you know) is why email is such a nightmare. Everybody (but the Unix diehards) including Microsoft and Apple have been trying to get those underpinning ripped out but...

shark47

Can you imagine what the outcry would have been if a Microsoft phone had shipped with only admin level accounts for all software and firmware, had weak passwords that were not even salted and were obtained by the hacker community via a dictionary attack within a week of shipping?

Or if they introduced a radio stack that dropped voice calls when you drove from a 3G to a 2G cell? (Ask Guy Kawasaki about that one)

But, on the Apple side, near silence.

@shark47

"If Microsoft had come up with a product like the iPhone, it would have been universally panned and a big failure."

All of the little bugs and annoyances, instead of being played down and justified as they are sometimes with the iPhone, would be drilled as proof positive of Microsoft's incompetence.

Dude1313 said:

JamesNT  said:

Paul,

"Still, I have a hard time embracing Windows Mobile as an innovative, exciting, or even interesting platform"

I'll take Windows Mobile over that stupid iPhone any day.

@JamesNT

"My contentions is that Paul wishes for the same thing; An Apple iPhone experience sans the Apple logo. And as soon as one comes close, look out.

You'll take  WinMo over the iPhone? Previously I was considering the Blackjack until I saw what it was running on, then ran away from it as fast as I could. You can put lipstick on a pig... its still a pig which is all WM 6 is."

What exactly is this experience? Is it the fancy transitions between various screens or nice looking icons? What exactly is this defined as?

And what exactly makes WM6 a pig?

I'm seriously curious.

"I think Weelittleonhorn is really an alias for Mike"

Sorry, but I don't put up with your american BS.

....er....

I think this use of ActiveSync in the iPhone was just the beginning.  I predict that the next iPhone (code named "XV" since it will add "cut and paste" capability) will also have WM functionality.  Steve Jobs will want a piece of the WM biz by offering a dual-boot iPhone, both OSX lite and WM7.  Why? Because by then, WM7 will have increased MS app capability:  Not only Word, Excel, and PPT, but also Access, Project, Visio, and a Sql Srv client, not to mention an improved Terminal services client for remote access of Vista running on your Mac at home.  People years from now will recognize that Bootcamp was the start down the slippery slope for Apple.  

"WM7 will have increased MS app capability:  Not only Word, Excel, and PPT, but also Access, Project, Visio, and a Sql Srv client, not to mention an improved Terminal services client for remote access of Vista running on your Mac at home"

They already have SQL Server Compact available for applications on Windows Mobile.  

www.microsoft.com/.../details.aspx

I kind of wonder if someone could make up a WM app that does photo management and editing, and ties into the SQL Compact db from Windows Live Photo Gallery on the desktop.  WL Photo Gallery ALSO uses SQL Compact - just the full desktop Windows edition of it.  Hmm....

Terminal Services on Windows Mobile already connects to Windows Vista on any system too.  The client software just utilizes the RDP protocol.  The server does most of the work.

"it also explains why we still have spam"

Yeah because it could not be the billion windows boxes (says Paul) that are hacked to pieces and turned into zombies.  No its the UNIX servers that run the back bone of the internet....yeah thats it.

dgrisman

SQL Server has been around for Windows Mobile for a while.

I don't know whether we'll see an iPhone Bootcamp or an iPhone Parallels (persoally, I doubt it) but Steve Jobs touting 3 ways to run Windows apps as one of the key new features of Leopard was not a good sign for future Macintosh specific apps. When the app you wrote for 96% of the market runs acceptably on the next 3.5% of the market, there's little incentive to do separate apps for that 3.5%. (Not zero, but not a lot)

That was the mistake IBM made with their "Better Windows than Windows" campaign for OS/2 Warp. Most of the devs said, "Hmmm, my existing winapps work fine on OS/2. Why hassle with writing a separate OS/2 app?" and they lost their remaining developer base. You can do that for compatibility or transition if you're the leader (like the OS/2 or Posix subsystems in Windows NT, Subsystem for UNIX-Based Applications in Vista Ultimate or HyperV in Windows Server 2008) but when you're #2 it is a losing game.

Snakedoctor.

Nope. You're flat out wrong on this one. Spam exists because of the design of the Internet's Unix-based email protocols. Sorry to break it to you. It can't be changed without killing interop of all those mail servers. It's been a source of industry debate and flat out fighting for well over a decade now.

"Wait. How does that help your argument that the iPhone doesn't compete with Windows Mobile?"

Well lets see, nobody but Windows Mobile users/business customers will know about the HTC phone, and I am guessing there will be hardly any news (mainstream news that consumers watch) and their wont be lines of consumer types out in front of the stores its sold at for days before its launched....so I am pretty sure is easy for most to see the difference, between the consumer oriented iPhone and the HTC oriented buisness/Exchange user.

I would never say that WM phones are ONLY for buisness and that the iPhone is ONLY a consumer phone in fact I did not......

"WM is by far a business product and the iPhone is by far a consumer product"

Various phone vendors are trying fancy up WM (see lip stick on a pig) and go consumer oriented but so far they have not had much luck.

Dam the BIAS Keith, sorry I dont bite.  I mean your leader Mr. Gates said that SPAM was going to be gone by now just two years ago....using the MS email ID solution???  What happened?

www.webpronews.com/.../gates-believes-spam-will-be-eliminated-within-two-years

Let see that was in late 04, so two year later Vista came out....maybe he thought it was going to sell like the iPhone, and that UAC would stop the zombies.

Your logic is like saying the freeways are killing people on the road, not the drunk drivers.

Nice try Keith.

BTW:  I used a Blackberry Bold 8130 today, and all I have to say is the keyboard is a complete joke.  When typing in certain fields, you have to click a button twice to get the second letter on it.  Ok, that's fine and all.  But in the browser, some fields don't work like that.  Instead they only accept the first button press, so if you press twice, it figures you want the first letter TWICE.  Only if you press the first letter, then backspace (marked "DEL" on the keypad instead), and then press the same button again, does it give you the second letter.  The dropdown suggestion box also tends to capitalize many words that have been typed in lowercase.

Overall, a completely frustrating ordeal, and not worth the $0 that Cdn mobile providers are offering it for.  I guess there's a reason why they give them away.  I realize that my aging Q is still far better.  Waiting for the Touch Diamond to come out on Telus....

Also, has anybody heard that Telus and Bell are switching to GSM/HSPA?  It's apparently quite true....both are making the move primarily because they are big sponsers of the 2010 Olympics and want to have global network support.  The change will be permanent when it's finalized though.  It would seem that only US providers will still be sitting on CDMA/EVDO networks.

Consumer or Business, over eighteen million people last year thought Windows Mobile was the right choice for them.

(Just bringing things back on topic)

"I think Weelittleonhorn is really an alias for Mike"

Sorry, but I don't put up with your american BS.

....er....

Um Ok Keith:)

"Steve Jobs touting 3 ways to run Windows apps as one of the key new features of Leopard was not a good sign for future Macintosh specific apps"

The 11th major OS release for Mac machines will be, quite literally, Windows 8.

Snake

"I would never say that WM phones are ONLY for buisness and that the iPhone is ONLY a consumer phone in fact I did not......

"WM is by far a business product and the iPhone is by far a consumer product""

So, of course then you'd be fine with: "Apple is by far a company that makes MP3 players", right?

If so, I'll be sure to forward any mail from Macintosh and iPhone users unhappy with being trivialized out of existance to you.

(In short, don't weasel word your way out of what you mean)

Snake,

Gee, you did do some homework. The mail ID solution was one of the proposals to fix the broken Unix-based Internet mail protocols that cause spam that got blocked. (In this case, at least partly, because it was a Microsoft solution)

As I said, "Everybody (but the Unix diehards) including Microsoft and Apple have been trying to get those underpinning ripped out but..."

It has nothing to do with zombies. Those are relatively easy to fix. What can't be fixed is the REQUIRED lack of authentication on origin and routing locations that allow spammers to hide their locations. Since the protocols REQUIRE the holes to stay open you can't fix it and stay compliant.

There goes that Keith logic.  Apple is by far a consumer oriented company and yes a good chunk of their income comes from "MP3 Players" no doubt about it and I would imagine most people would agree.

Does that mean they dont care about the business sector no not at all, but facts are facts.

Just like MS is by far a business oriented company with most of its income coming from Office and Windows and most would agree (Paul included) but the also care about the consumer market.

Snake,

by the logic you used by the "by far" weaseling, it would be equally fair to say that Macintosh doesn't compete with real computers because since Apple is "by far" an MP3 vendor, the Macintosh is just an iPod accessory.

That would be ludicrous. Just as ludicrous as your "iPod does't compete with Windows Mobile" premise.

"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...

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. :-)

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.

by the logic you used by the "by far" weaseling, it would be equally fair to say that Macintosh doesn't compete with real computers because since Apple is "by far" an MP3 vendor, the Macintosh is just an iPod accessory.

That would be ludicrous. Just as ludicrous as your "iPod does't compete with Windows Mobile" premise.

JHC your thick Keith, to bad we can create a poll on this lame blog site...

Question is Apple more of a....

A. Consumer oriented company?

B. Business oriented company?

Do the same for Microsoft.

Every now know what the results would be....or everyone but you I take.

I mean you buddy Paul has said so many times.

Maybe I should put it this way...........would Apple be hurt if they could only keep their sales made on business products?  Would MS be hurt if they could only keep the sales of consumer products?  They would both go under.

I love the comment "Real Computers" have you ever used one....oh no I have seen your Linked in profile sorry.

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

Tero, 18M seems to be a lot when you consider it's only OSs that Msft is selling.  The mobile OS market is very fragmented, with most of the players having OS/hardware combos.  But, really, I don't think MSFT takes WM very seriously.  It's almost like they feel they need to keep a "toe int the water" lest they get blindsided like they did in the middle 90s by the internet and Netscape.  Actually, that's an interesting question:  how many of MSFTs ventures outside of Windows and Office are just defensive plays?  And that's not a bad thing to do...they don't want to get caught flat-footed when the next big thing comes along.  MSFT  gains expertise in their non-core competency areas, making a little money at the same time.    

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 !!!

T-Mobile Shadow, Samsung Blackjack, Motorola Q, HTC Diamond. All consumer oriented WM phones. Now tell me why Apple and MS don't compete?

"...and there comes Mike baiting for the fanbois... "

And the fanbois did take the bait. Wonders!

"I guess Jihadist like Warfare.... "

Yes, and their attacks are getting more and more personal. At least Mike has been civil. I don't understand why you guys had to go after him like that.

And there's nothing wrong with what he said. No one seems to get upset when Paul criticizes Microsoft. But any mention of Apple and the everyone gets their panties in a bunch. And then you guys go and attack anyone who dares defend Microsoft, calling them names like "Winjihadist" etc. Amazing!        

"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.

DaveInLa

Since you care about my credentials to discuss computers, don't forget

Security Program Manager at Aditi at Microsoft

and

Program Manager at Microsoft

(Oh, and I wrote at EDI system before that)

Now, what were your credentials?

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.)

Waethorn

"When they can't make a valid point, they attack the oppositions credibility."

But the nice part of not being anonymous is that I have credibility and they found documentation to prove it.  :-)

"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)

"At least Mike has been civil. I don't understand why you guys had to go after him like that."

Actually sharky is the first post in this blog civil?  Juvenal yes, civil no.  He brought on everything he got by starting out that way.

So Keith there were other operating systems in 82, wow I did not know????  My point was, how many had a email routing protocol for routing email outside of their environments????  Answer NONE.  There was MTP and UUCP but they were never ratified.  SendMail on UNIX was the first to use but every email product on every platform used it.  I once administered a MailWorks server on VMS and it even used SMTP.

Its SMTP the mail routing protocol, used by all email programs on all operating systems, and NOT UNIX that is outdated.  Hell many SMTP big internet SMTP gatways these days are appliances that are a stripped down version of some Linux distro that has multiple MTA's and does nothing but route email.  I would even argue with the popularity of Exchange that more email goes through Microsoft SMTP servers than anything else.

Man and I though the computers used by the early space programs just had hamsters in them on a wheel.....thanks for clearing that up!!

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.

John

"Apple needs to keep the focus on speed and stability here. "

I think you meant "Apple needs to PUT the focus on speed and stability here".

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. (Anecdotal but when even Guy Kawasaki criticises a major Apple product in public a lot must be broken.)

"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.

Currently running Windows Mobile 6.1 on a HTC S620 Smartphone.

Can be quite slow at times and lacks functionality of my Symbian based smartphone. I do like the sliding panels on the home screen and the Windows Live integration but i think Windows Mobile still feels empty.

It needs a lot more work to keep up with apple and symbian's mobile operating systems. 18 million licenses sounds like a lot but i bet they don't work that out in solid retail purchases.

Anyways thats my 2 pennys on this topic....or my 2 cents if your American :)

"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?

mikegalos@msn.com  said:

Everybody (but the Unix diehards) including Microsoft and Apple have been trying to get those underpinning ripped out but...

And why could that be (assuming your premise is 100% correct). Does anyone truly trust MS enough? I'm sorry but any attempt at a "redesign" and MS is going to be there pushing their vision at the expense of everyone else. No one trusts them and with good reason.

What we have here is a failure to trust, same as MS entire brand equity which amounts to $1.50. Their entire business model is based on a lack of trust or at least that has played out over the years:

- Where did MS get the code for Media Player?

- X Box failure rates anyone?

- Abandonment of Play for Sure partner despite protestations to the contrary.

- The boondoggle/vaporware of Cario?

These are just some examples of lack of trust from MS as a company and a brand.

I also chuckle at the black and white world you all inhabit. That Apple's mistakes are of the same magnitude as Microsoft:

I trust Apple's products; are thy prefect? What is in life? 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. Rather lame IMHO and couldn't be more systemic of Microsoft's entire culture really. Vaporware and selling the next vision while ignoring the problems of the current products is so much more convenient. Problem is for MS is that people are finally waking up to the "Matrix-like" nature that is Windows.

Mike you harp on Apple for lack of innovation (of which I disagree, but to each his own); try this one on for size. Microsoft has been in "maintenance mode" since 1995. Their entire business is now predicated on protecting the Office and Windows monopoly at any and all costs and not innovating as a result. Almost everything they have launched in the last 5 years has nothing to do with Windows. So how is this different from Apple which you so deride based on your view of Apple's lack of innovation?

"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 App