Comments on: Microsoft confirms plan to evolve Windows Phone over time

By: Windows Phone needs to “Shit or get off the pot” « Ponderings of a Developer

Thu, 17 Mar 2011 19:22:50 +0000

[...] known holes and issues. That’s fine because we, the customers, were told the platform would be updated and evolve over time. Now, whatever the definition of “over time” actually meant, the [...]

By: gragib

gragib — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 05:27:52 +0000

Oopsie. I said:

… iPhoneOS 3.0 can run apps compiled for 1.0 IIRC …

That should be:

… iPhoneOS 3.0 can run apps compiled for 2.0 IIRC …

iPhoneOS 1.0 didn’t have 3rd party apps.

By: Paul Thurrott

Paul Thurrott — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:41:28 +0000

I talked to Microsoft today about speaking with Charlie K. or some similar to verify what’s happening there. Hopefully, I’ll know soon.

By: chrisrpatterson

chrisrpatterson — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:40:14 +0000

I think extending hubs is referring to adding new hubs. I think extending the existing hubs will be there in the first version (as they have shown with the pictures hub). Though not all hubs may be extensible by thrid-party developers.

By: wilbev

wilbev — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 18:07:28 +0000

Paul,

An important question that I think needs to be answered by Microsoft, possibly Charlie, is whether they plan to introduce an updated Zune device that runs the Windows Phone 7 OS, but is not a phone. Basically you can run all WP7 apps on this non-phone device. Maybe they don’t want to answer that right now because of the backlash from current Zune owners, since this will likely need new hardware.

By: gpsarakis

gpsarakis — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 15:34:21 +0000

The windows update type system is in place already, the whole OTA (Over The Air) system. Bigger stuff through Zune though, which makes sense.

But I agree, they have to do updates more often than 6 months.

By: Mike Cerm

Mike Cerm — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 15:34:18 +0000

I think you’re right; it’s OK for a platform to be “incomplete” at 1.0. What’s most important is that the manufacturer show some dedication and direction, and that the necessary tools are in-place to provide functionality down the line.

The iPhone is both a good example. The original iPhone OS was very light on features, but it was a good enough building block that Apple has been able to basically just keep stapling on new features over time, in a very iterative fashion. Nothing in the iPhone has changed since then really, just new things being integrated into the system. And from a hardware perspective, the same iterative process has bumped the storage, memory, processor speed, camera, added GPS, all with virtually no change in form-factor.

The iPhone is also a good counter-example, or an example of how a limited platform CAN’T be extended. Look how app notifications just show up like text-messages. It sucks, but that’s basically what happens when you keep piling new features onto a system that wasn’t intended to handle them. Also, it would appear (since the iPad is running a fork of the OS, and still won’t be unified on the next release), that some pretty substantial changes were needed to make iPhone OS run at different resolutions.

It’s all about getting the balance right. As long as Microsoft can initially bring enough of the functionality and features that users want/need in a phone, it’s alright if some stuff hits the cutting-room floor, or gets held for the future. As long as the foundation is strong enough to support the features down the line, and Microsoft can actually deliver them in a timely fashion, the platform can succeed.

By: roteague

roteague — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 15:31:50 +0000

I agree with all your points. The one thing that I think Microsoft needs to make absolutely clear, is that this device will be updated on a fairly regular schedule. Microsoft doesn’t always make these things clear to the general public.

By: gftw

gftw — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 15:13:00 +0000

Bad move for MS. It is typical for them. Let out details way in advance and some of them change by the time it launches. It creates confusion for the consumer, add in the typical MS multiple versions which adds more confusion.

The problem is they must start some place. I guess they could wait until more of its done, but then waiting would put them behind.

Like Paul’s recommendation for the iPad, wait for V2, I would say the same thing about Windows Phone 7. If users wait 12-18 months, then they will find out a lot, like how fast MS add’s missing features and how much app developers support it.

By: secondruntv

secondruntv — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 15:10:15 +0000

I’m not too bummed about the news… hopefully the OS will never be feature complete and they will always be adding stuff… I just hope they can deliver updates regularly… If we have to wait 6 months for a 1.5 or 2.0 update to get any of the new features that will be shame… if they can implement something like the desktop version of windows update and allow for smaller updates more often that would be fantastic.