Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

Lumiaman, im not sure what level of knowledge you had, but 3GS able to upgrade to IOS6

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

What I was trying to say is that we didn't have those 3rd party toolkits/libraries/environments on the Maemo/MeeGo series due to the insignificant user base (in the grand scheme of things; I do think that one could still earn some sweet cash even on the N9 with some `killer app`), WP7.x didn't have those not only because it's, at this point, insignificant but because the platform couldn't handle them, at least not in a way that would not break or limit the rest of those 3rd party environments if they want to keep the consistency across platforms.

WP8, on the other hand, will most probably get them not only because it can support them (native code and all that jazz), but because Microsoft, unlike Nokia, ain't shy to throw money at their projects so the 3rd party providers of those environments can get a strong fiscal incentive to make them available for the WP8 as well. Microsoft forced the Xbox in the market by shear money throwing, why would it be different with WP - the fact that their user base is atm. pretty insignificant won't stop Microsoft from pushing.

Actually, the very fact they have an infinitesimal user base allowed them to do this bait-and-switch with their system now - most of the current WP users chose WP specifically either from the love of the UI (whaaat? people have the right to have no taste at all :P) or Microsoft (they also have the right to be irrational) so they are far more forgiving than the general population. Nokia didn't have that luxury with their quite significant user base, which is why they are now in the dire straits.

Anyway, back to the point - existing WP7.x users got royally screwed as the WP8 will get all those things that WP7.x cannot support, so quite a lot of new apps (especially games) will not work on the old devices. I just find it hilarious for some people to rationalize that with hardware differences - it's not as if the WP7 couldn't run native if allowed to (I'm pretty sure that IE was not written in .NET), it's just that Microsoft can't be bothered with that. With the N9 (and the N900 prior to that) we at least knew our devices were DOA, but we relied on their openness and the respectable community to at least get us some cookies; those who bought in the WP7.x won't have that luxury.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

It could be hardware. If the core of what MS defines as WP8 needs more ram, a bigger flash partition to hold the OS, requires multiple cores, or other hardware for encryption, NFC etc .etc.
Microsoft doesn't allow native code in WP7 because they knew they would switch to NT kernel. Windows CE is very different and doesn't support the same API and libraries as NT.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

Oh, I'm perfectly aware of the limitations, but don't tell me that Microsoft couldn't do it if they wanted to - they most certainly have an in-house native SDK for the WP7.x so all they'd have to do is just add different targets in VS and of course limit API usage and such for each platform specifically, but you'd still be able to use vast of the business logic from your app to target both platforms.

It would be a pointless thing to do from Microsoft's perspective, but would gain them some positive PR. They judged that their existing small user base is not worth all the trouble and I'm okay with that, I just have a problem with rationalizing why something can't be done. WP7 to support native 3rd party would be a breeze, to have a layer of WP8-like APIs on top of it would be a bit more difficult, but still - it's not as if Microsoft couldn't do it, nor that the hardware is the biggest limit. FFS, I did native coding for a device with 32MB of RAM and something that cannot be called a CPU by any modern definition of the word, running Windows CE - don't tell me I couldn't do that on the WP7.x if allowed.

The thing is, Microsoft had three viable paths in this transition:

1) Build a MinWin kernel for the existing devices
2) Back-port all non-HW restricted goodies to WP7.x devices (and that includes native SDKs with similar APIs and so on)
3) Just say - eff them, give them some of the Start screen bling and call it a day

And they've chosen the third one. I'd even argue they did the right thing here, at least from the financial and development time point of view, but don't give me that crap that Microsoft couldn't do it any differently.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

I wonder what will happen to the Nokia stock when Microsoft announces the flagship in-house built WP8 phone. Let's hope Nokia wasn't stupid enough to not have this scenario covered by the secret treaty. However, the fact that it already happened with tablets leads me to think otherwise. They might be ****** in the *** hard by Microsoft. Needless to say, this would seal the fate of Nokia.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

Kind of disappointing to come back to an empty PM box though somewhat expected. I think your MS buddy is either pulling your leg or you are pulling mine. Should I still assume this dropbox link would arrive? If not then it's rather nice of you to tell somebody they don't know what they are talking about and promise them knowledge as to why, only to not deliver any at all, either yourself or your buddy from MS.

It still seems to me you have mistaken the "embedded" from Windows Compact Embedded to mean non-flashable firmware. I still have not received any information as to why a WP7 phone cannot bootstrap a different OS/kernel other than Windows CE. In fact I linked to an example of a WP7 where it had been replaced already and have done it with much older (a Compaq iPAQ) personally. Unless your MS buddy can show otherwise I will assume s/he is incorrect.

To be honest I wouldn't be surprised if your MS buddy is pulling your leg, it seems they are pulling everyone elses:

This was the excuse on another forum
Does anybody remember when they were publicly saying WP7 was a complete rewrite?

The guy didn't even explain why it doesn't work on WP7 devices
WP7 launch device:
HTC HD7
QSD8250 is ARMv7 in fact I can't think of any launch device that was pre-ARMv7. Lumia 900, ARMv7. Now what remains to be seen is the OS ram footprint. if WP8 does not support 512MB ram, I will eat my hat.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

"waves hand"

Sure. That's why you have the choice of quite some kernels in Linux/BSD/UX land....

Also, why does a different kernel require "significantly" more RAM?

I smell either politics (maybe even carrier/industry-related) and/or, as usual, plain incompetence behind the reasonings from MSFT.

EDIT: wasn't there an experiment undertaken by some guy to test how many iterations of a certain Microsoft desktop OS older (OLD) hardware could boot? Simliar to, but not exactly this.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

That article is plain wrong. That is not what Microsoft is doing and you will see that.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

Sorry, was on call until now, just emailed a couple of MS buddies of mine. I do have a feeling will get similar answer, but honestly with a closed system as is embedded C and NT, there are multiple conflicts when comparing the two, and with the limitations of embedded C on limited hardware, the only thing I saw that could go on a such a limited device is Android, which is only semi-open.

And with the ARM argument, you could go the other way and say, yes ARM support is there, but only for high end/next gen chips, since ARM generations are so different from each other due to order customizations from OEMs.

You are obviously very gungho in trying to jam NT onto a Lumia, I think that would be a cool project to try, and for you to post your results on this forum. There should be ways to try, certs to be purchased, etc, and if it works, then you showed them, good for you.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

Unfortunately There is no other way for me to say it so I'm going to be rather frank here, what you said in the first two paragraphs is complete nonsense.

I'm not gung-ho about putting WP8 (NT) onto the Lumia, I couldn't care less for the Lumia range though I do sympathize with those who bought them, at the same time, as I already said, I don't blame them for not going back and putting NT on the current Lumia range. It would have required development time that they obviously and understandably did not deem as worth it, but lets not make any mistakes, the possibility is there.

I only wanted to set the record straight, that other reasons spreading around the internet that it isn't possible are bull, I wanted to do this before people start repeating it as fact. Since the launch of WP7 the amount of times I heard that WP7 was a complete rewrite was staggering and the amount of times that I tried to convince them it wasn't often fell on death ears. MS have a history of it, they like to muddy the waters with public statements. One other example right now: it seems it's difficult to convince people that the difference between WP7.8 and WP8 is not about one having hardware like dual-core or NFC (there are WP7 NFC phones already) yet that's what a MS statement led them to believe.

It's bull, WP7.8 could benefit greatly from native code support, those with NFC could benefit greatly from the wallet feature, they could benefit greatly from the shared Windows 8 core. Yet by that starting line alone people think that WP7.8 is basically WP8 only without NFC or dualcore. You will see it repeated everywhere I'm sure. It will be hard to convince these people that this is not the case too because often they don't understand the technical side of the discussion so to them it becomes a matter of who to trust only.

"MS + Random commenter #1 vs Random commenter #2"

they often pick (MS+random commenter #1) then they themselves become random commenter #1 in another thread repeating everything they heard.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

Which part(s) do you disagree with?

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

already posted it a couple days ago...
Flop literally killed NOKIA with his ignominious statements (Burning platform & all)
'til that @$$O started farting out those statements, NOKIA was the n°1 mobile device manufacturer and the sales of Symbian devices where growing. slower they the general market (certainly then the latest iPotatos figures) but still, growing. considering there were already on top, with a comfortable margin....

before that, m$ could even hope to regain foot in the (mobile) market the same way they became top dog in the PC market... simply getting shipped / sold with every (IBM or others') XT/AT/PC (the 1st Personal Computer models).
if that @$$O had shut his @$$O & not started farting so badly all over, ppl would have gone on buying NOKIA devices and...
Bllamer has all rights & reasons to be angry @ Flop/Fart. m$ spent a small fortune (very small, with respect to there means) supporting NOKIA "in the transistion", all for nothing.

of course they don't care whether NOKIA survives.
why would they?


as to the general discussion wp / 8 / wm...
how many times do you have to make fundamental architectural changes before getting it right?
how many times do you have to put past customers on a one way no exit lane?

how long are you going on, claiming they'll ever get it right?

m$ only got to be m$ because IBM was too lazy to develop an OS themselves for XT/AT/PC
that was ~30 yrs ago
back to... the present? because of Flop/Fart they lost their last chance to get it right...

period, end of discussion

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

http://www.gottabemobile.com/2012/06...ying-iphone-5/

Apple is just sneakier than WP. WP will have 7.8 update, which is what Apple is doing for 3GS. MS will rule soon, and you are smarter than that to know.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

You are so wrong. Lumia is a better experience overall. N9 is a frustrating, non-optimized, non-fluid, stuttering ******, whose software development was stunted by inadequate engineering.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

They both have hiccups. I just had an issue where an incoming call on my Lumia 900 would light up, then go black and I couldn't turn the screen back on.

Both the N9 and Lumia 900 have randomly disconnected my Bose Series 2 bluetooth earpiece as well as my Pioneer car stereo system.

I've had, within the last week, a random reboot on the Lumia 900. And while on the phone, getting back to an incoming message is not as simple as getting to one when you're not using the phone. And something that I've never seen before happened... I had a phone call come in, while I was on the phone... and then another call came in right after that, disconnected the middle person, only keeping the last person.

I've taken pics that look great on the phone only to have them look all noisy and horrible when I transfer them. Timeouts on uploading 68k filesize images to Twitter and e-mails being sent multiple times.

All Lumia 900. I can go deeper if you wish.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

Linus Torvalds on Microsoft hatred:

I'm a big believer in "technology over politics". I don't care who it comes from, as long as there are solid reasons for the code, and as long as we don't have to worry about licensing etc issues.

http://www.osnews.com/story/21887/Li...d_is_a_Disease

I may make jokes about Microsoft at times, but at the same time, I think the Microsoft hatred is a disease. I believe in open development, and that very much involves not just making the source open, but also not shutting other people and companies out.

There are 'extremists' in the free software world, but that's one major reason why I don't call what I do 'free software' any more. I don't w

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

Would you care to shed a little light on what it is that you actually do?

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

we may not know what he does but we know what he doesn't do. he doesn't w

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

No. There is a difference:

If an app is developed for IOS6, which doesn't use any of the features unavailable on that handset, then it can still run on the 3GS.

If an app is developed for WP8, it will never run on WP7.8.

That is a big difference.

I don't know how much more simply it can be explained.


:)

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

Who here has a hatred for MS other than misterc? This is a linux community, yet I've only ever seen misterc as a real MS hater. Linus only last week:

http://www.splicd.com/MShbP3OpASA/2426/2437

At least Linus agrees that their public statements are mostly bull.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

Another myopic interpretation. 3GS will not get full ios6 experience. Period. This is not all about apps.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

There has been no spread reasoning about this. Everyone in the computing community knows NT cannot be squeezed onto an embedded C machine, can't be done, not on embedded C. This has been known for years, from every version of embedded c, NT, etc. This is NOT new news.

It is unfortunate that this was not explained to Lumia owners, but without this change in platform, there would be even more fragmentation across the boards...not there is isn't fragmentation. Look, you call it bull, fine, but know that this is not some epiphany, NT and embedded C were NEVER compatible within machines, all embedded machines are not able to take NT due to way too many conflicts.

I understand that you are very upset about this, but it has been known for years on all versions.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

For WP it is. WP7.8 will get the full WP8 "experience" but no WP8 apps. I even imagine the experience will be better on WP7.8. There's lots of things CE isn't, but it is light weight and easy going and it is a RTOS. NT is a monster in comparison, and at least on any X86 Windows pre 8, it has no realtime capabilities at all, the timing accuracy is non existent.

I don't know if Win RT, the "RT" stands for RealTime ? In any case I can't believe they just smacked a vanilla NT on a phone without some heavy modifications to cut off some weight and include some realtime capabilities. But will it be more fluent than WP7.X ? I doubt it. There is also the power management to consider where CE is top notch, which cannot be said about NT. WP8 may run fluent and nice - for two hours.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

I think I'm going to reply one more time and give up because this is wearing thin on me. I do not care for the Lumia range, didn't buy one, so I'm not upset about this at all. However you have promised me real technical information from your MS buddy twice now and I have yet to receive any. At the beginning you were saying Windows CE was unchangeable now you are saying a kernel cannot "fit" or has some kind of unresolvable "conflict" with this older hardware. I would just like to know what these apparent conflicts are that make you believe a kernel cannot be written for older hardware too. I'm certainly not expecting it to just work in the current and final state that MS have made it now, I'm asking why you believe it was technically impossible for it to have been written to support older hardware. I already know and stated why it was not practically possible because of development time and ROI but you still seem to believe it's technically impossible and promised to tell me why Windows CE cannot be replaced.

Instead I got yet another empty promise of official MS info from your buddy and some mumbling about closed source and Android open source, as if that makes any difference to MS. It's not like they do not have access to their own kernel source and drivers. The embedded C part was just nonsense. Just read it

I mean, that's nonsense which contains no useful information at all and I think you are aware of it yourself already.
Then you started talking about OEM customization of ARM generations. The instruction set for the ARM devices are exactly the same between WP7 and WP8, namely ARMv7. It hasn't changed. All the WP7/8 phones are Qualcomm Snapdragon SoC, S2/3 and S4 though I'm not sure how relevant you think that is to a supposed technical conflict since kernel support is not mutually exclusive anyway.

So what I've been saying for the past 5-6 posts is that there is no technical boundary to it as you wrongly claim, it's merely a problem of time invested. That's all I have to say on this topic really.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

RT=Runtime

WP7.8 will not get the full WP8 experience. It will be nowhere near it.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

First off, technical information was never promised, I emailed my msft buddies to see if they could release tutorials, which they are looking into. Secondly, all you keep repeating is squeezing nt on an embedded c environment with older arm v7 devices with lower specs, which cannot be done, like newer specced nt arm machines...it is as though you just keep repeating the same thing over to hopefully have it be able to come true. Keep repeating it my friend, and maybe the Balmer and Elop fairy will magically put nt on an old arm embedded device. :)

Hilarious how you keep believing that you can. You must really be quite upset about this nt and embedded c situation...did you consider emailing msft brass about this, then maybe you won't lose sleep over it? ;)

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

I don't think you know what you're talking about, and I'm not sure you know the difference between a kernel and an operating system. Please stop.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

If you know these things, then explain it.

I don't know exactly what I am talking about. But NT on embedded? NT is designed for any kind of CPU, but not any kind of architecture. It requires PCI bus for instance. Without a PCI bus there is no way of doing the timing right for instance, well everything handled by the bus. NT has no mechanisms to handle any low level HW stuff that isn't supported by a standard bus. Very much unlike CE that is able to run on everything.

It's probably not impossible (WinRT obviously works), but a complete rewrite for every configuration would be needed. As I understand WP only runs on one particular architecture, and who knows what that looks like? I mean who on this board. Do you? The WP8 hardware architecture may very well be made to support NT, not the other way around. Probably a combination.

NT not being able to run on WP7 HW sounds more plausible than not to me. But what do I know? You are obviously such an expert, please explain.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

You forgot to add "programming language" to that list.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

What is "Runtime" supposed to mean here?

You don't know how the experience between WP7.8 and WP8 differs, so please don't pretend you do.

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

http://articles.businessinsider.com/...s-nt-microsoft

it's named after this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Runtime

If you are asking why Windows on ARM was named after Windows Runtime and confused the hell out of everybody, then I don't know but the RT stands for runtime according to MS, not real time.

says the guy who said the following with certainty and with added emphasis:

You are right I don't know for certain what 7.8 will include, they may just invest in a large development team to bring the same experience but I'm not holding my breath, I'm going by what has been confirmed so far and making an educated guess. So far WP7.8 is just a start screen addition.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-c_vk0UnlIk&t=1m45s

I suspect, and I guess I should have made that clear, that there will be little effort to develop everything they do in WP8 for WP7.8.

If you want to place bets I will even be specific about features I suspect will be missing from 7.8:

No Skype over lock
No Encryption
RTC Alarm wakeup
Limited Multitasking in WP7.8 in comparison to WP8
No Separate volume controls

We can come back and look at this when 7.8 releases.

Re: Nokia's Flagship obsolete in less than a year?
 

When Google has provided the option for one year old SGS2 to upgrade to ICS. Why can't MS Provide an option to upgrade just a 6 month old Lumia to Windows 8. What MS dosen't realize is their MAP Engine is powered by Nokia. Without that their OS is half nothing. Neither Google or Apple will provide MS their MAP Engine

Re: UPDATE: "1st post" Nokia's Flagship Lumia 900 obsolete in less than a year? ELOP RESPONDS
 

Of course it won't.

Nobody claimed it would.

It is a three year old handset.

How up to date will the Lumia 900 software be in 3 years time?

Obviously Apple wants to encourage customers to buy the latest handset as much as possible via feature differentiation.

But at least if a new app is developed which isn't demanding of the hardware (such as Instagram, DrawSomething, or whatever the next trend is) then it may run on the 3GS without issue.

The app extension/metaphor is therefore not compromised. The 3GS customers can still spend their money happily in the app store.

Currently, the Lumias, which are the current WP Flagship handsets, and also the Nokia flagship handset, will have NO compatibility with apps made for WP8.

This break in compatibility has occurred months before any WP8 handset is available.

(Remember that the Lumia 900 has only been generally available since May 2012... it still IS the latest handset unlike the 3GS...)

Microsoft has set fire to the WP7.x platform...

Will MS have to disseminate special 'messaging' about the WP7.x and WP8 compatibility to developers too:

Will MS tell developers the following?
"Yeah we released a new WP8 SDK, but please use the WP7 SDK instead for most purposes, to allow WP7 users to use the apps".

or will it be:
"Yeah we released a new WP8 SDK, but please develop for the WP7 SDK too, if you can, to be nice to WP7 users".

or neither?



That is correct. It is not all about apps.

But it's not what you would do if you were trying to do the following:

• Improve sales of your current WP7.x handsets
• Expand your platform and third party support
• Keep your current (very fragile) userbase loyal

Would a salesperson in good conscience recommend a Lumia handset now (or any other WP7.x handset) to any customer when he knows the future of that platform?

For new handset sales, if the WP8 handsets were going to be in the shops tomorrow, then the announcement would have less impact on new WP sales, because the salesperson can push the latest version. But they can't do that because the WP8 handsets aren't on the shelves yet. (Though it would annoy customers who just bought an L900)

This is incredibly poor strategy from MS.

It is also incredibly poor strategy from Nokia to be 100% at the determination of platform control from a department of a software company who have not been successful in the field. They should have kept another horse in the race ;)

MS are competing against Apple and Google, who are not idiots.

The customers and the salespersons are not idiots.

Customers, developers, salespersons, and carriers are all making their buying/selling/resource decisions, you have just given them all a reason NOT to buy-in.

Well done, great move.

It's almost as if every 12 months MS thinks, "that didn't seem to take hold, it's okay we'll start our real effort in the next OS release", but hey they can bankroll it.

However good WP8 is, the continuous burning of the users, manufacturers, and carriers will serve as a reminder to not jump on to the WP platform. They will not be able to escape the fact that buying into a WP8 handset will be a gamble, based on previous MS actions, therefore people are likely to buy in. The WP platform and handsets have just been flagged as 'hazardous' which is not what users want.

We've just seen that T-Mobile is cancelling its plans to sell the Lumia 900 in Germany due to the WP8 upgrade issue. All this indicates that Nokia needs an alternative OS to be able to push when their primary horse decides not to race for a while. The award winning thoroughbred N9, and future N10 and N11 handsets based on Harmattan would provide the perfect antidote.

Given that the latest WP8 debacle has caused sales projections to fall further, and the Nokia share price to drop further, this proves the single-horse strategy is wrong from a financial perspective, and must be serving some other purpose.

I realize the above is mostly obvious to most people, sorry.

:)