599
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella admits giving up on Windows Phone and mobile was a mistake
(www.theverge.com)
this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2023
599 points (96.7% liked)
Technology
59578 readers
3381 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think they can still reboot with an Android base. They can just do what they did for edge. Pull a Google. Sell hardware with very polished software. Android would give them full access to all Android apps. Also they already have outlook and office apps made for android.
Honestly I would rather see a large company like Microsoft build their own OS from the ground up. Without play services you wouldn't be able to use a lot of play store apps even if you installed the apk file. I think Google provides a lot of baked in services to developers to lock their apps into the google ecosystem. Microsoft wouldn't really add anything of value to android in my opinion, we already have one big company looking over our shoulder, I don't think we need a second. I think the Amazon Fire phone proves that even with a lot of money to burn it's hard to break into google's market.
Microsoft making their own platform that is not UNIX-like would probably get a lot more interest than just modifying android.
They are going to have the same problem they had with their original phones. No apps. They could never get enough developers to care about the OS without a user base. You also can’t get a user base without apps. That’s what killed the windows phone.
Amazon tried to use the kindle formula on a cell phone. The problem is that the main reason the kindle was successful was there was no real competition. They also only need to provide books not apps for the kindle. The cellphone market was a lot more mature with a ton of options. They came in with a mediocre phone that had less apps and less configurability. They tried to do the Apple walled garden on an Android phone. Clearly they didn’t understand their market.
I don't think there is all that much money in handsets, which is why every phone company does their own weird version of Android to try to get advertising revenue on the back end.
That is correct. The money is made on the searches. With their own phones, they can push their own search engine and Ads. Google did it so they could force other makers to standardize. Microsoft can do the same thing. You make money the store. Android just makes it easy to port apps to Microsoft’s app store Developers won’t be required to code a new app just for Microsoft.
Android open source bits are fine and all, but a lot of apps require Google Play Services which is not open or free.
Google Play Services has some quite strict requirements to adhere to in order for Google to licence that to you.
This includes have certain Google apps preinstalled on the device. Including Chrome.
I also doubt Microsoft would be happy with Google having the ability to cut them off whenever they damn well please.
There are a ton of phones in China running Android without google services . If you try to cut off Microsoft you would also be hurting all those Chinese phones. Google also can’t do that without being sued by Microsoft for not allowing competition.
Well, the idea behind FOSS is that you can share the common stuff and build your own stuff on top and while doing so improving the common stuff, testing uncommon usecases and adding features.
Personally I would love to have another bigger company working on Android next to Google, because that means they would (hopefully) implement their own "google services", to not rely on Google.
If that takes off, then apps will need to support both, making it more sensible to either create stable generic interfaces, where a third completly open-source implementation can more easily dock into, or not rely on them unnecessarily.
The only real problem with android is that the license is not GPL, so companies are not required to cooperate and likely end up creating their own silos.
microsoft does have a launcher for android. I've heard good things about it, but haven't used it myself so can't confirm
I feel like the steam deck proves that we aren't really all that far from a feasible mobile linux device. Its like 90% of what a phone OS would need to be. I'd buy a Steam Phone from Valve. Imagine an accessory with controllers, access to the whole steam store, and the ability to dock to a TV or monitor. I think that could actually work, especially since so many games are already compatible with the deck as it is.