Author Topic: I'm so old, I remember when people paid Microsoft to use their software (Read 11047 times)

zridling · « **on:** February 14, 2011, 07:09 AM »

Nokia CEO and recently former Microsoft employee Stephen Elop did the deal for Nokia. (He worked for the company for only two years, but became its 7th largest shareholder?!) Oh well, just another wall to the internet: choose your shackles: Apple, Google, Microsoft, et al. This ain't about software, this is about the future of charging customers for every single move they make with their devices and the right to advertise them to death.

Microsoft to pay out 'billions' as part of Nokia deal
http://www.computerw...s_part_of_Nokia_deal

Nokia CEO Elop Denies Being "Trojan Horse" For Microsoft
http://www.businessi...for-microsoft-2011-2

Renegade · « **Reply #1 on:** February 14, 2011, 08:12 AM »

Well, it will hopefully put a third player in the game. Symbian is dead. Has been for a while. We need better competition to get the mobile world moving. I for one will be very happy to see Nokia and MS get into the market. (My bias is entirely because I want to see better ways of doing things get better adoption/penetration. i.e. The CLI. C++ is ancient and needs to die.)

Eóin · « **Reply #2 on:** February 14, 2011, 08:26 AM »

What about C++/CLI?

Also, I really love C++ as a language, especially with the new 0x additions, it's just so elegant.

f0dder · « **Reply #3 on:** February 14, 2011, 08:55 AM »

C++ is ancient and needs to die.)
-Renegade (February 14, 2011, 08:12 AM)

No, but people need to use the right tool for the right job. Many who are doing C/C++ should probably be doing C# instead (or not be programming at all), but saying that C++ needs to die is is stupid; you just don't get the same kind of computational performance in C#.

housetier · « **Reply #4 on:** February 14, 2011, 09:05 AM »

For me it is the end of Nokia as a respectful company. For a while it seemed they really where into Maemo: we hosted the first Maemo conference at c-base.

And it was nice to have a manufacturer that seemed to encourage playing around with their hardware; N900 is an example of that.

But for my prejudiced eyes it seems Nokia will become another subdivision of Microsoft. And that is quite repellent for me.

superboyac · « **Reply #5 on:** February 14, 2011, 09:09 AM »

It's a messy business. I think I'm going to miss the days where I could buy cool new gadgets without a monthly subscription fee for something or other that will come with it.

Eóin · « **Reply #6 on:** February 14, 2011, 09:52 AM »

Nokia really had no choice but to switch OS, and the two options were either Android or Windows Phone. I'm a big Android fan myself, but only time will tell if Nokia and MS succeed.

superboyac · « **Reply #7 on:** February 14, 2011, 09:55 AM »

Nokia really had no choice but to switch OS, and the two options were either Android or Windows Phone. I'm a big Android fan myself, but only time will tell if Nokia and MS succeed.
-Eóin (February 14, 2011, 09:52 AM)

I hope MS can come up with an awesome phone/tablet OS with Windows 8 or whatever they have planned. Either that, or I hope Android becomes better for tablets and can do something about the fragmentation.

40hz · « **Reply #8 on:** February 14, 2011, 10:31 AM »

I hope Android becomes better for tablets and can do something about the fragmentation.
-superboyac (February 14, 2011, 09:55 AM)

The problem is the telcos all decided they were no longer going to get consigned to doing nothing other than provide the conduit like AT&T does for the iPhone. Most telcos thought AT&T "sold out the industry" when it caved in on Apple's demands in order to get an exclusive on the iPhone.

So in light of this, I'm afraid 'droid fragmentation is going to continue as long as Android needs the telcos more than the telcos need Android.

40hz · « **Reply #9 on:** February 14, 2011, 10:58 AM »

superboyac · « **Reply #10 on:** February 14, 2011, 11:25 AM »

I hope Android becomes better for tablets and can do something about the fragmentation.
-superboyac (February 14, 2011, 09:55 AM)

The problem is the telcos all decided they were no longer going to get consigned to doing nothing other than provide the conduit like AT&T does for the iPhone. Most telcos thought AT&T "sold out the industry" when it caved in on Apple's demands in order to get an exclusive on the iPhone.

So in light of this, I'm afraid 'droid fragmentation is going to continue as long as Android needs the telcos more than the telcos need Android.

-40hz (February 14, 2011, 10:31 AM)

Interesting. I don't know exactly what you are referring to, but I believe you. Why can't the Android OS be designed in such a way where it can be installed without any special modding onto all iphone devices? You can install Windows on any computer with any hardware, why can't Android be the same way? Is it because the hardware on cell phones not nearly as standardized as normal pc hardware? I'm assuming that's the case, but even with that I think Google has the resources to be able to figure out a solution. I mean, if they can practically mind read off all the data they collect, I'm sure they can figure out how to make an updateable/installable OS for phones that would work without any tweaking.

mwb1100 · « **Reply #11 on:** February 14, 2011, 11:42 AM »

Why can't the Android OS be designed in such a way where it can be installed without any special modding onto all iphone devices?
-superboyac (February 14, 2011, 11:25 AM)

I think the problem isn't on Google's side, it's that right now the true customers for phone hardware are the carriers, not you and me. And the carriers decide that phones should be locked down (for supportability as well as for 'lock-in'). One thing that might help move the system software to be generically installable - at least on some devices - will be systems that aren't phones. Touch-like Android devices and/or tablets that are useful without being phones.

If we ever get true carrier-transferability in the states, it might happen for phones as well.

mahesh2k · « **Reply #12 on:** February 14, 2011, 11:45 AM »

Symbian is dead.

Eh ? i do see less expensive devices using that OS. Sony Erricson is using that OS on low cost mobiles.

superboyac · « **Reply #13 on:** February 14, 2011, 12:07 PM »

Why can't the Android OS be designed in such a way where it can be installed without any special modding onto all iphone devices?
-superboyac (February 14, 2011, 11:25 AM)

I think the problem isn't on Google's side, it's that right now the true customers for phone hardware are the carriers, not you and me. And the carriers decide that phones should be locked down (for supportability as well as for 'lock-in'). One thing that might help move the system software to be generically installable - at least on some devices - will be systems that aren't phones. Touch-like Android devices and/or tablets that are useful without being phones.

If we ever get true carrier-transferability in the states, it might happen for phones as well.
-mwb1100 (February 14, 2011, 11:42 AM)

I see. I keep forgetting about that. Man, wouldn't it be wonderful for a company to just start making cell phones that are blank slates, not tied to any carrier? I seriously think they could become the Dell of cell phones. But I'm sure the telco's would fight to the death before they allowed something like that to happen.

zridling · « **Reply #14 on:** February 14, 2011, 12:27 PM »

Man, wouldn't it be wonderful for a company to just start making cell phones that are blank slates, not tied to any carrier?
-superboyac (February 14, 2011, 12:07 PM)

Google did in '09 with the Nexus, and it promptly died when carriers pulled out after thinking about giving customers software choices. They found out they could charge for that stuff!

...the carriers decide that phones should be locked down (for supportability as well as for 'lock-in').
-mwb1100 (February 14, 2011, 11:42 AM)

Hey, isn't that the same argument book publishers are making about ebooks? Small world.

superboyac · « **Reply #15 on:** February 14, 2011, 01:05 PM »

Man, wouldn't it be wonderful for a company to just start making cell phones that are blank slates, not tied to any carrier?
-superboyac (February 14, 2011, 12:07 PM)
Google did in '09 with the Nexus, and it promptly died when carriers pulled out after thinking about giving customers software choices. They found out they could charge for that stuff!

...the carriers decide that phones should be locked down (for supportability as well as for 'lock-in').
-mwb1100 (February 14, 2011, 11:42 AM)
Hey, isn't that the same argument book publishers are making about ebooks? Small world.
-zridling (February 14, 2011, 12:27 PM)

That's very unfortunate. Shit. That's terrible. Just this weekend I was thinking how cool and amazing it would be if companies like Apple or the phone manufacturers started making completely open, touch screen devices. Basically, just a screen with an OS and nothing else. Then, each of the manufacturers or the consumers can take that device and use it for whatever specific purpose they needed by adding software to it. So, for example, I need an alarm clock...I go to the store, buy a small $100 touchscreen device, install the alarm software...BAM, dedicated alarm clock. How cool would that be? I could do the same for a bathroom radio, a remote control, etc. It's all about having the blank device, and having it be cheap enough where you can just dedicate them for each thing. With a $700 tablet, you don't want to just use it as an alarm clock because it's too expensive (even though I'd still be tempted to). But this would be way better than having to buy a real alarm clock that has 1/10th the features of a software alarm clock. This would be a terrific idea, and someone is going to do it and get rich relatively soon. i wish I could be the one.

The locking of these readers and tablets is very annoying. I just jailbroke my ipad this weekend, just so I can load the freaking awesome comic reader app called "Comic Reader Mobi". Oh my...reading comics on that thing is so fun! It can enlarge ONLY the text bubbles, and has a really cool magnifying lens feature. It is such an amazing application, I'm loving it. Now, this app was banned from itunes because it needed a convenient way to load those cbr cbz files onto it, which goes against the closed filesystem rules of Apple. So the guy just made it available as a jailbroken app only. But it kicks the butt of all the other "legit" comic readers out there. Just one example of how the restrictions are preventing the users from enjoying great innovation and convenience. The ipad is PERFECT for this kind of comic book reading.

JavaJones · « **Reply #16 on:** February 14, 2011, 01:07 PM »

While I agree that locked devices are really crappy, I'm not sure I see the need for a $100 alarm clock.

- Oshyan

superboyac · « **Reply #17 on:** February 14, 2011, 02:42 PM »

While I agree that locked devices are really crappy, I'm not sure I see the need for a $100 alarm clock.

- Oshyan
-JavaJones (February 14, 2011, 01:07 PM)

Hey, that's just you. I'm not the only one. It's not uncommon anymore to see alarm clocks now that have mp3 playing capabilities, as well as some deluxe boom box features, and they sell for well over $100. So the day is coming, my friend. Guys like me would gladly pay $100 for an alarm clock that can do a lot, vs $30 for a old-fashioned clock. I mean, the super cheap clocks are crap, i would never use one. The mid-range clocks brag about having multiple alarms (usually two), and not much flexibilty with those alarms, and they can easily sell for $30-50. So this idea is very reasonable. It's going to happen sooner or later. If I were a manufacturer, I'd just create a bunch of different sized, different-speced screens with android on it, and users can use it for whatever. I'd make a tiny 3" version that people can use as desk clocks, or mp3 players. Then I'd have mid-size version for things like a desktop calendar, or a screen on the fridge to write notes. Then I'd have a big boy for portable computing, like the tablets today (ipad). Why should we be limited to the buttons and features the hardware manufacturers decide to include? Just give us a blank device and we'll choose how to use it.

JavaJones · « **Reply #18 on:** February 14, 2011, 02:50 PM »

I suspect the vast majority of people wouldn't know what to do with such devices and they would not sell well. They would sell great to a small subset of the market, but I doubt they would catch on enough to make it worth a hardware manufacturer's time to make a bunch of different "blank" devices. They'd have to invest tremendously in making them easy to use, customize, and fit to your purpose, and that in itself is very difficult and time consuming.

Nonetheless it's a beautiful "vision".

- Oshyan

mahesh2k · « **Reply #19 on:** February 14, 2011, 04:26 PM »

Man, wouldn't it be wonderful for a company to just start making cell phones that are blank slates, not tied to any carrier?

Are all cell phone brands are tied to carrier in united states ? or you can buy sim and phone separately ?

superboyac · « **Reply #20 on:** February 14, 2011, 05:00 PM »

Man, wouldn't it be wonderful for a company to just start making cell phones that are blank slates, not tied to any carrier?

Are all cell phone brands are tied to carrier in united states ? or you can buy sim and phone separately ?
-mahesh2k (February 14, 2011, 04:26 PM)

it's not universal, but predominant. There are certain phones that you can buy "unlocked/jailbroken", but they are usually not offered that way in brick and mortar stores or through official vendors. So you have to go out of your way to get it (ebay, craigslist, etc.). If you do get one, yes, you can just swap in your sims card. but this is not what the "man" wants you doing.

JavaJones · « **Reply #21 on:** February 14, 2011, 05:50 PM »

Not only that but very, very few carriers in the US actually allow you to just use their service by swapping in a SIM card. Only AT&T and T-Mobile (and maybe MetroPCS) support them I believe. Further, there are two different major technologies used by cell companies in the US for voice calls (not to mention myriad data technologies, particularly with all the different 4G systems currently being rolled out). So ultimately, even if you can buy an unlocked phone, you're likely to only be able to use it one or two carriers anyway. The US cell phone situation is really messed up compared to Europe, from what I understand.

- Oshyan

mahesh2k · « **Reply #22 on:** February 15, 2011, 02:32 AM »

Here in india, only apple and blackberry are locked to carrier (with post-paid plan)and from last year even they're open to sale. I think this change was because of too many Chinese mobiles in market. Due to more options people hardly pay attention to any handsets which are locked.

zridling · « **Reply #23 on:** February 15, 2011, 06:51 AM »

Tim Anderson says that Nokia's Elop fears mobile duopoly. He tries to make sense of it: "This is not good for Nokia, though it might be 'the least bad of all the poor choices facing Nokia'." He also talks about how Nokia killed off the Qt devs within the company after saying they were the future. Oy.
http://www.itwriting...is-already-here.html

But then I read Loic Le Meur on the "new nightmare of developers and brands" that all these platform ecosystems are creating, and I can only imagine how devs might be tearing their eyes out of their sockets:
http://www.loiclemeu...pers-and-brands.html

You need to be on all the above platforms stores, of course. But wait, there is more. You need to submit and manage your app to the mobile carrier app stores, they all have one. That's only a start, wait until the manufacturers themselves, the Samsung, Dell, HP and Sony have theirs, HP has one with the Palm acquisition... Even Amazon has an store for applications. Bonus startup idea of the day: create a service to help register and manage my app in all those stores in all languages, I can be your first customer.