Windows Phone - The Rant
OK, I said I wanted to write a little blurb on each of the mobile OS's out there. And I thought it would be best to start with the one I like the most, to emphasize that while I may be biased, I'm not blinded to the flaws.
First, the arguments I read most regularly against WP7 and why they are rubbish. And those are, Apps, Hardware and Screen Resolution (yeah technically hardware).
Apps. This is a legitimate problem for a potential buyer. But it isn't the # of apps that is the issue. It is the absence of certain particular apps. I'm sorry, but at 70k apps, I've maybe looked in any depth at 1% of that in the 1.5 years I've had with this OS. But this isn't an OS problem. It is an ecosystem problem. And it is a sadly circular problem. People won't buy WP7 devices because App X is missing. Developers of X won't build WP7 port because there aren't enough users.
Hardware. Seriously, if I hear this argument again, I may explode. For once, Microsoft delivered a remarkably performant operating system (I know it sounds like it should be an oxymoron but it isn't). It does more on less than both iOS and Android. My first gen Windows Phone has a slower older processor than my brand new Nokia Lumia 800. Guess what? I have yet to hit a scenario where an app runs any better on my new phone, if I had paid a premium for a dual or quad core... I would feel cheated. And that is precisely because every app runs seamlessly on both devices. Yes some people like to see the impressive specs... but I think it would backfire. People would fork out an extra $100+ extra hardware and eventually realize they got nothing for that extra money.
Screen Resolution and Pixel density. This is simply the blubbering of idiots. My fiance has an iPod touch with the same retina display in an iPhone 4. Guess who's device I'd rather read a big text filled web site on? Neither! They have screens that fit on a bloody cell phone. It is purely a luxury feature. I'm sorry, but neither screen resolution nor pixel density can get you over the hurdle that is the size of a cell phone screen. When it comes to reading websites, or looking at large HQ images... I use my first gen iPad, or a laptop, or something that doesn't fit in one hand. To put that in perspective for you... my iPad screen is well over double the screen size of my lumia 800, but isn't over double the resolution (though I don't think it's TOO far off on that point) and in terms of pixel density, my lumia 800 has 252, and the iPad 1 has 132. So, I prefer consuming content more on a device whose resolution vs size is actually slightly worse than my phone and has VASTLY inferior DPI (so poorer image clarity).
So, I ended up talking up Windows Phone more than I planned. So where does it fall short?
Customization: I'm sorry MS. I love the metro UI. But any platform (even Apple) needs carriers and manufacturers to help sell their phones. And since you aren't Apple, the only way to entice the carriers is to let them mess around a bit. I'm not talking open source, or even access under NDA. The easy solution? Create a new 'type' of application which can be used as an app hub and can replace the start screen. Think like the HTC Hub, but instead when you hit the home button it takes you to the hub. Allow the user to disable them and allow the carrier/manufacturer to set a default, most people will never change the default, so the manufacturers get to put their special little touch on it. This is such a simple concept, and so powerful.The manufacturers would love it, in turn the carriers would learn to love it, and you would win over a number of people who don't want to be stuck with just one persons vision for how the phone OS should look. (Note: I don't think if this were possible that I would use a custom one... just noting that this is a huge flaw in marketing and perception of the OS).
And my other point was on the API's. Windows Phone provides a Silverlight based SDK. The SDK is great, simple, easy to use and an all around joy. But there are a lot of things that are closed. Some applications can use them. Mostly MS applications that shipped with it and key partners. This is my biggest beef with the platform and as much as I love my phone, this is a pretty big one. IF YOU CANNOT WRITE YOUR OWN APPS WITHOUT BREAKING YOUR OWN RULES, YOU HAVE DONE SOMETHING WRONG!!!! Like F***ing seriously. If it is an application and not a core OS feature, you should be able to write it with the same tools you make available to your community of developers. Period. Your applications should be a shining beacon of what others can do and should strive to do. They should encourage innovation. But none of that can happen when the applications you provide have access to and leverage things your community can't.
So, there are actually 2 reasons why some apps aren't on the WP7 market place. The reasons mentioned above, and in some cases, the developers wouldn't be able to do the things they needed without special permission from Microsoft.
And that is my WP7 rant.
First, the arguments I read most regularly against WP7 and why they are rubbish. And those are, Apps, Hardware and Screen Resolution (yeah technically hardware).
Apps. This is a legitimate problem for a potential buyer. But it isn't the # of apps that is the issue. It is the absence of certain particular apps. I'm sorry, but at 70k apps, I've maybe looked in any depth at 1% of that in the 1.5 years I've had with this OS. But this isn't an OS problem. It is an ecosystem problem. And it is a sadly circular problem. People won't buy WP7 devices because App X is missing. Developers of X won't build WP7 port because there aren't enough users.
Hardware. Seriously, if I hear this argument again, I may explode. For once, Microsoft delivered a remarkably performant operating system (I know it sounds like it should be an oxymoron but it isn't). It does more on less than both iOS and Android. My first gen Windows Phone has a slower older processor than my brand new Nokia Lumia 800. Guess what? I have yet to hit a scenario where an app runs any better on my new phone, if I had paid a premium for a dual or quad core... I would feel cheated. And that is precisely because every app runs seamlessly on both devices. Yes some people like to see the impressive specs... but I think it would backfire. People would fork out an extra $100+ extra hardware and eventually realize they got nothing for that extra money.
Screen Resolution and Pixel density. This is simply the blubbering of idiots. My fiance has an iPod touch with the same retina display in an iPhone 4. Guess who's device I'd rather read a big text filled web site on? Neither! They have screens that fit on a bloody cell phone. It is purely a luxury feature. I'm sorry, but neither screen resolution nor pixel density can get you over the hurdle that is the size of a cell phone screen. When it comes to reading websites, or looking at large HQ images... I use my first gen iPad, or a laptop, or something that doesn't fit in one hand. To put that in perspective for you... my iPad screen is well over double the screen size of my lumia 800, but isn't over double the resolution (though I don't think it's TOO far off on that point) and in terms of pixel density, my lumia 800 has 252, and the iPad 1 has 132. So, I prefer consuming content more on a device whose resolution vs size is actually slightly worse than my phone and has VASTLY inferior DPI (so poorer image clarity).
So, I ended up talking up Windows Phone more than I planned. So where does it fall short?
Customization: I'm sorry MS. I love the metro UI. But any platform (even Apple) needs carriers and manufacturers to help sell their phones. And since you aren't Apple, the only way to entice the carriers is to let them mess around a bit. I'm not talking open source, or even access under NDA. The easy solution? Create a new 'type' of application which can be used as an app hub and can replace the start screen. Think like the HTC Hub, but instead when you hit the home button it takes you to the hub. Allow the user to disable them and allow the carrier/manufacturer to set a default, most people will never change the default, so the manufacturers get to put their special little touch on it. This is such a simple concept, and so powerful.The manufacturers would love it, in turn the carriers would learn to love it, and you would win over a number of people who don't want to be stuck with just one persons vision for how the phone OS should look. (Note: I don't think if this were possible that I would use a custom one... just noting that this is a huge flaw in marketing and perception of the OS).
And my other point was on the API's. Windows Phone provides a Silverlight based SDK. The SDK is great, simple, easy to use and an all around joy. But there are a lot of things that are closed. Some applications can use them. Mostly MS applications that shipped with it and key partners. This is my biggest beef with the platform and as much as I love my phone, this is a pretty big one. IF YOU CANNOT WRITE YOUR OWN APPS WITHOUT BREAKING YOUR OWN RULES, YOU HAVE DONE SOMETHING WRONG!!!! Like F***ing seriously. If it is an application and not a core OS feature, you should be able to write it with the same tools you make available to your community of developers. Period. Your applications should be a shining beacon of what others can do and should strive to do. They should encourage innovation. But none of that can happen when the applications you provide have access to and leverage things your community can't.
So, there are actually 2 reasons why some apps aren't on the WP7 market place. The reasons mentioned above, and in some cases, the developers wouldn't be able to do the things they needed without special permission from Microsoft.
And that is my WP7 rant.
Comments
Post a Comment