One of the biggest advantages of Cortana was its ability to interface with third party application pretty much at launch (something Siri and Google Now still don't do much of). Going cross platform is awesome though I'm not sure if it'll be quite as useful. Realistically Microsoft could strike a deal and make an Android phone use Cortana by default (which might be really good) which would be quite interesting (especially if it could integrate with third party apps on Android, too).
One thing that makes me hesitant when choosing a new app is what platform(s) it's available or will be available on. I bounce between Android and iOS almost once a year; this type of ubiquity Microsoft is pushing makes me use their products more and more because I know they'll be available everywhere I go.
With Microsoft's recent friendliness to CyanogenMod, I'm thinking the latter is pretty likely. Combining this with a good competitor bundle to replace the "Google Apps" package that generally goes hand-in-hand with installing CyanogenMod on a phone (so including Outlook, a mobile Office, Cortana, some Bing stuff, etc.) would be at least a decent strategy. So, instead of downloading a "gapps" package to be flashed alongside CyanogenMod, a user could instead (or even in addition) download a "mapps" package that would give the user a more Microsofty experience. Hell, maybe Amazon could get in on this with an "aapps" package for things like their custom app store, Amazon Video/Music/Kindle, etc. (which would, granted, compete with their own forays into Android, but they already make these things available to normal Android devices anyway).
The issue in tech has never been who has the best tech wins. Over and over it isn't about technology or better this or that. It is based on mindshare of developers, the market position of the product and public demand for the item.
Window Phones are good tech. The phones are designed very well. The OS is fluid and it does things well. I just can't ever see it breaking into double digits of market share in the next 5 years due to public demand for Windows items and the lack of mind share. Maybe in 5+ years. I think MS has a better chance of just doing a Amazon and fork Android.
Maybe in 5+ years. I think MS has a better chance of just doing a Amazon and fork Android.
I really, really hope they don't do that and stay focused on Windows.
I would never, ever have thought that I'd say that, but since using a Lumia 1020 I have to grant that Microsoft created a damn good, flexible and extremely usable OS for mobile devices.
Remembering that atrocity that was Windows CE I never would have thought this possible and I really intend to stick with the platform. Despite the fact that software selection is somewhat limited compared to Android and iOS (which, practically speaking, is not really that consequential).
>It is based on mindshare of developers, the market position of the product and public demand for the item.
No, no, no. This war is won by distribution. Your mom doesn't go to the store to buy an android phone. She goes to buy a phone. Which phone? The one that the friendly employee at the store proposes. Which one is that? The one that the store manager tells the employee to push. Which phone is that? The one that corporate headquarters tells stores to push. Which phone is that? The ones with lucrative kickback schemes. Which phones are that? The ones that manufacturers decide.
Which phones will they decide on? The phones in partnerships with the company that changes their agreements and APIs every quarter? Maybe they will chose the company that they have a very profitable partnership going on for 3 decades. The company that has the power to waive a magic stick and turn them from unprofitable/breakeven to well into the green. Comapnies pay a lot of money to MSFT every year on patents. Samsung paid $1bn last year alone. Every manufacturer is losing money on smart phones because of that. Guess what? If you push our phone, we can share those patents with you. Oh, btw, we can subsidize those windows phones, give you some cash advance on the OS you sell for us just to stitch things up for the next few quarters.
Microsoft is all about business. Big business. Big partnerships. They suffocate competition in a very deliberate manner. Google hasn't competed ever with anyone. Moreover, Erick Smidt tanked Novel back in the day because of poor relationships with their partners.
On top of that, the OS will be good. Nobody will complain. Lots of phones will be sold in the lower end market. Some corporate deals will be done for the mid and high end markets and the ball will get rolling. Developers will be happy too. MSFT is making big progress in that lately. You also get the added bonus of developing for the windows PC and tablet platforms, in addition to the phone platform. Everyone will make lots of money. Except google.
I think your argument falls on one Company's name HTC. They went BIG on Windows Phones. They made a good phone. They failed. There was a big push at Sprint for Windows Phones a few times and I still see very few in the wild.
People don't go to buy a "phone" in 2015. They go to buy an iPhone, a Samsung or Note4, than the other 1/3 of the market are people who buy the "free phone" which is a thing of the past. Now it is cheapest phone which people have already got burned on. People talk about what phone all the time. Not I got what the store sold me. If they sell you anything it will be an expensive iPhone or Note.
My friend's teenage kids both hated their Windows Phones because they weren't iOS and thought it was uncool. "It wasn't even a Samsung." They both broke the phones so that they wouldn't have to be seen with them.
Ha extremely true. There is absolutely no way Google is going to let Microsoft peddle on their turf. They have been not so subtle about wanting to avoid windows phones for their core products and even to some extend actively sabotaging (remember that whole fiasco with Google blocking maps for Windows phone users?).
This makes me wonder if investing in Cyanogen was a wise strategy for Microsoft? This way they could get past the gates of Google and into the land of Android.
Don't forget about the YouTube fiasco where Google forced Microsoft to withdraw their unofficial app even though they tried everything to comply with Google.
>Realistically Microsoft could strike a deal and make an Android phone use Cortana by default (which might be really good) which would be quite interesting (especially if it could integrate with third party apps on Android, too).
Is there no way for the user of a Android phone to set Cortana as default? That seems strange given Google's and other folks' claims that Android is open.
If this is the case then it looks Android is more closed than a Windows PC where it would be trivial for a developer to create such a service without the platform owner's permission. How is Android more open than Windows again?
If this is the case then it looks Android is more closed than a Windows PC where it would be trivial for a developer to create such a service without the platform owner's permission. How is Android more open than Windows again?
Windows (desktop) is more open in the sense that the platform has fewer constraints on what the user can do by default. Android is more open in the sense that most of the source code is available. These points are not exclusive and do not conflict with each other. It's possible to have a very "hackable" platform without any source code at all - if there is enough interest in RE - and also a very limited platform of which all the source is available, but crypographic signing and other measures get in the way of being able to modify the software.
Windows (phone) is far less open though, and in general this has been the case with mobile devices.
But Windows (desktop) is slowly getting more locked-down too, as a consequence of the "war on general purpose computing".
The user can. BinaryIdiot means striking a deal with a manufacturer, the same way PC manufacturers make agreements to preinstall software on Windows machines.
But while manufacturers such as Samsung can and have agreed to preload Microsoft apps on Android devices, I don't think Google would allow manufacturers to change the search provider. Though that still doesn't prevent them from preinstalling Cortana, or replacing the homescreen with a Cortana launcher.
Partnering with a custom ROM such as CyanogenMod is certainly an option, too.
I assumed Google's requirements for allowing the Play Store on devices would include making Google the default search engine, but I may be mistaken, since it seems Android devices with Bing or Yahoo as the default have appeared in the past.
I'm sure Google would love to add that requirement. But with antitrust regulators from the U.S. and EU salivating at the chance to hit them for monopolistic practices they will avoid anything as overt as that.
Then why does Microsoft say this in their blog post:
>Although the functionality will be very helpful, because it’s “just an app” there will be certain things that Cortana does on Windows phones that won’t work on Android devices or iPhones. Some features require access to the system that aren’t currently possible with iOS or Android, so things like toggling settings or opening apps won’t initially be available in the Cortana companions for those platforms. Similarly, the ability to invoke Cortana hands-free by saying “Hey Cortana” requires special integration with the device’s microphone, so that feature will be limited to Windows Phones and PCs.
Is it a design decision or a platform restriction?
Tasker can certainly change settings and launch apps, so I don't see why Cortana couldn't. Maybe Microsoft just means it's more difficult? They do say certain features "won't initially be available", which implies they will in the future, though this contradicts the statement that the features "won't work".
Hands-free voice control is tricky because Qualcomm controls hardware support. There are some workarounds if you don't want to license Qualcomm's tech, but I guess Microsoft may not want to use such hacks. Otherwise, without Qualcomm's dedicated always-on voice coprocessor, leaving the mic on would drain the battery.
Android is very open, if it wasn't how could other companies take the OS and make their own very successful clones. Such as Amazon or any of the Chinese variants. No one has done that with Windows.
There's a subtle irony in that while Cortana can probably be more deeply integrated with Android than iOS, the same can't be said for Google Now on Windows Phone...
Yup. Android is still far more open than Windows Phone/mobile from that point of view, which is why it's possible for Microsoft to do many of these things with Android. Last I checked you couldn't even have another browser other than IE on Windows Phone, and I assume that won't change with Windows 10 mobile.
Also you can make Android apps work on Windows or another OS relatively easy but the reverse isn't true (not counting the very hacky WINE on Linux).
All of that still shows that at least for now Google is still much more "open" than Microsoft is.
The unfortunate thing is that these moves where Microsofts gets to integrate with "open" stuff from Google, and then gets all credit for doing that, is only going to force Google to become more closed to stop Microsoft from doing that. It's kind of a nash equilibrium.
When you open up a lot of stuff and your competitor uses it freely and gets credit for doing that, but you can't do the same with your competitors' products - what's the outcome?
It reminds me of when Gtalk was open right until Microsoft wanted to integrate it with Skype. Then Google shut down that API because it couldn't have done the same with Skype, and Microsoft would've been the one with the app that has "both Skype and Gtalk", and not Google.
Android is open, Google is not at all. Google is actually pulling source code off AOSP (the actual open-source Android) to put more of it into their custom, closed-source applications. As a result, a base install of Android without all Google's services is very poor and pretty outdated. [0]
Most of the work Microsoft does on Android (and iOS) would easily be replicable by Google on Windows Phone: Office, Skype, OneDrive... are all apps that Google has competitors for on Android and iOS. Instead of playing the same game, Google chooses to be the evil one. [1]
> As a result, a base install of Android without all Google's services is very poor and pretty outdated.
You can install AOSP or custom ROMs such as CyanogenMod and have a perfectly free, modern smartphone OS. You won't have access to all the Android apps in the Google Play Store, but that's self-evident. The F-Droid repo provides verified FOSS apps, or if non-Google proprietary sources are permitted there's the Amazon Appstore.
> Most of the work Microsoft does on Android (and iOS) would easily be replicable by Google on Windows Phone: Office, Skype, OneDrive... are all apps that Google has competitors for on Android and iOS.
The app in question, Cortana, will be able to integrate into Android at least as deeply as the Bing app does now, which means it can replace Google search in most ways. If Microsoft had an Android launcher, they could ensure Google is completely replaced (by supplanting Google Now). Combined with Microsoft's existing Android lock screen and other apps, all that's needed to complete the Microsoft Android experience is Windows Store for Android.
On the other hand, the closest you can get to replacing Cortana on Windows Phone is to disable Cortana completely, which means queries will be handled by the search engine in your default browser instead. IE is the only browser option, but you can choose either Google or Bing (except on phones that disable the Google option).
Google does achieve remarkable results on iOS despite its restrictions. But that simply demonstrates the monumental effort it would take to bring a sub-par version of the Google experience to a locked-down platform, whereas Microsoft can take over Android with relative ease. iOS has marketshare and legacy ties to justify the expense, but WP has neither.
That is an impressive spin. He's not talking about apps like Office, etc. he's talking about Windows Phone having less extensibility points than Android. Like being able to plug in 3rd party browsers, voice search/assistants, etc.
That first article is poor and you're giving it as if it's a valid reference.
I have an older Nexus 4 that I keep around, with CyanogenMod installed on it and without Google's services, which is pretty much AOSP. Despite what seems to be popular opinion, it's quite usable. The big thing that is missing and the reason for why Google affords to keep mobile phone makers by their balls are of course Google Play, Gmail and Google Maps. You do have F-Droid and Amazon's app store. It's quite an interesting experience - if you have an Android lying around, try it out.
>When you open up a lot of stuff and your competitor uses it freely and gets credit for doing that, but you can't do the same with your competitors' products - what's the outcome?
You mean like how Chrome is bundled with Flash and Java updates on Windows, yet alternate browsers cannot even be made for Chromebooks?
>is only going to force Google to become more closed to stop Microsoft from doing that.
Being "Open" is about principles, no matter the outcome. If you close off something because people are using it, then it was never open in the first place.
It's like saying I offer you $100 on the condition that you won't take it. What would be your reaction if MS restricted Secure Boot on Windows to stop Linux because people are dual booting or switching to it? Or what if they block Chrome on Windows to boost IE/Edge? Would you say they are being forced to do that because Chrome is getting marketshare, like you said Google was forced to close Hangouts and Android?
>Android is still far more open than Windows Phone/mobile from that point of view
From any point of view. WP is the tightest OS I can think of (or at least as tight as iOS) without the user benefiting from it in any other way besides general security.
Heck, even the settings menu is depressingly limited.
Opera Mini, not the full Opera Mobile browser. Like on iOS, the loophole is that web pages are sent to Opera's servers for processing, therefore the app itself bypasses the restrictions on rendering engines.
It's similar to mobile Chrome's "Data Saver" feature, or Turbo mode in the full Opera Mobile browser. Great for saving data, if you're on a limited connection.
Would be nice if you could set it as the default browser on iOS or WP, too.
IE 5.5 on OS 9 was, at the time, the best browser available for the platform. Literally every fruity iMac had it and used it by default that I ever encountered. Including my own.
Was that native support, or was it based on OS 9 / Classic emulation? I know that the PowerPC versions of OS X (i.e. every OS X up to and including 10.5) supported running OS 9 software in a sort of emulation layer (though I don't remember if this was first-party or third-party; I do recall PowerPC Macs with OS X having a "Classic Mode" that booted into OS 9, however).
How about they actually get around to releasing it on Windows Phone? I bought a Lumia 735 three weeks ago partly based on advertising on the MS NZ site that said Cortana was available. It's not, and now they've removed that page.
The most annoying thing about that is the "quiet hours" feature is somehow dependent on Cortana, so the phone doesn't do that either.
(Other than that, very nice phone and OS, just hobbled)
Thanks - I did try that but I haven't been able to come up with any combination of location and regional settings that works on this phone. Even setting it to US everything doesn't work.
Did you check for updates in store and settings after changing region and language to UK? I made it work once and I'm not even in an English speaking country.
I dont know how many of you are windows phone users but I think Microsoft missed a few very important features with Cortana. Most notably the qr scanner and Bing backgrounds that they had with the previous search feature. It diminished my experience soo much that I disabled Cortana entirely from my phone only to go back to the default search, which is just as good if not better than Cortana. I wasn't a power user with Cortana by any means, but they sure didn't bring the features up to Cortana that they already had with default search. I still love my phone, but the default search is much nicer feel than clunky Cortana.
Really, you used QR codes? Those two things I never thought about. I don't remember much about the previous experience, but I use Cortana quite a bit. Just having it be smart about suggesting directions, flight tracking, reminders, text messages, all from one point where I can either speak or type, makes it a thing I go to without thought. Voice recognition -> helpful answer is the best overall intelligent assistant I've used.
It's interesting that Microsoft seems to be using the same playbook they used with Windows -- make the software run everywhere and sell the software that goes with it. While Apple keeps using their playbook -- make software that goes with their hardware so that people buy the hardware.
It will be interesting to see which one wins out this time. So far it's clearly Apple, but time will tell.
Arguably Apple has been playing it's playbook without any competition from MS so far (since MS started by copying Apple's strategy on mobile - which was obviously now an unrealistic move)
This on the other hand, looks like real competition - and competition is always exciting.
>It will be interesting to see which one wins out this time. So far it's clearly Apple, but time will tell.
If you want to compare apples to apples (no pun intended) you should take a look at software sales. So far, neither seems to be doing that well on mobile platforms. I have never bought a Microsoft nor an Apple app on my mobile devices.
Not sure that's really a relevant comparison given that Microsoft is (effectively) a software company and Apple (effectively) a hardware company. Apple's relative lack of software sales on mobile does not prevent their software and ecosystem from driving literally hundreds of billions of dollars of high-margin hardware sales.
"But the release of Cortana and the companion app—as well as other fully featured Microsoft apps like OneDrive, Office and Outlook.com—on iOS and Android is an acknowledgment that Windows phones will likely never be chosen by a significant chunk of even the most diehard Windows users"
Microsoft Excel 1.0 was first on Mac, there was never a 1.0 for DOS or Windows. Windows is still the monopoly on PC with 90+% share due OEM and EFI. For the mobile devices both iOS and Android are big, then comes the smaller rest of Win, Blackberry, Bada, Jelly, Ubuntu, FirefoxOS, etc. WinCE had a head start 20 years ago, but especially the die hard Windows users turned away from WinMobile 6.5 (CE based) as it was dumped with all its app eco system in favor of WinPhone 7 (still CE but with only Silverlight/XAML apps) that was as useful as Android 1 or iOS 1.
Looks like it was quickly knocked off the front page by the flamebait detector thanks to the offtopic toxic comments accusing MS employees of voting up the the post.
During the Microsoft Build event a lot of Microsoft employees registered new HN account (shown as green) and up-voted MS related headlines in the following days. Not that I'm complaining but it looked more like a coordinated effort. HN certainly relies on some automatic voting ring detection.
One thing that makes me hesitant when choosing a new app is what platform(s) it's available or will be available on. I bounce between Android and iOS almost once a year; this type of ubiquity Microsoft is pushing makes me use their products more and more because I know they'll be available everywhere I go.