Guest Southwestwall Posted February 27, 2003 Report Posted February 27, 2003 We know that the feedback on SP2002 omissions/errors/wishlist functions has been aired and made its way back to source via this forum, the microsoft.public.smartpphone NG and the MVPs. Considering the large amount of suggested fixes and improvements [iMHO to bring the OS up to scratch], it may be fair to hint at the time-honoured axiom of "Don't run before you can walk." The party line seems to be "wait and see what's in store for future releases". Perhaps it would be far more prudent to bring SP2002 to maturity with a service pack, containing the majority of required/requested fixes and improvements. Why? If nothing else, to gain a 'tried and tested' base for features and experience for future releases - it does more harm than good when a new OS ends up carrying "beta" improvements that could have been implemented and tested. Service packs have always worked for PC OSes, so why the change with phones? How about repaying the current user base for their "beta testing", perseverance and feedback... With a PC, for example, you always have the choice of upgrading to a new OS when it becomes available. From what has been intimated here, new OSes will only be passed through operators, if they bother. Not good news for users, as the telcos have based their business model firmly in the short term, and have deep pockets matched to short arms. Do you really think Orange will provide SP2003 to SPV users, say a year down the line? Will they bother with the hassle of distributing a new OS when they will want to force everyone into migrating to new handsets by then... If a positive precedent is not set on this issue, it will not only be the users that lose out. There is only one place from whence the remaining improvement for the SPV can come... and the next OS will be too late, even if offered at all. The faith in this emerging market has been shaken enough already, notwithstanding the confidence haemorrhage that 3G, the next supposed market, is suffering before it is even brought to the masses. The downhill path is always easier to follow... ...and the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Guest RCAM Posted February 27, 2003 Report Posted February 27, 2003 (edited) In case you did not notice Orange just issued an update which contained MS fixes as well. Also according to Microsoft there will not be any "major" changes in the Smartphone Platform for years, until .Net is intigrated. That could mean no SP2003... Look at PPC, they did not have a 2001 version, infact MS has not released an odd numbered OS since WIN95. Its a pattern they use for marketing. 2004 will have all of the new MS goodies like XBOX 360. Edited December 8, 2008 by RCAM
Guest Southwestwall Posted February 27, 2003 Report Posted February 27, 2003 Au Contrere, In case you did not notice, the UK SPV update was primarily issued to address core hardware issues. Even people from MS have stated as much. Just look at the update file's properties - it has come straight from HTC. My post above relates to the functionality of the OS, i.e. the software and apps/utilities contained therein. I don't recall asking for any "major" changes. There are plenty of omissions and counter-intuitive functions in the OS and apps that MS would do well to address. There are some blinders that have annoyed/frustrated many users... no Inbox management, lack of media player controls, etc, etc. I could go on all day, or better still, recommend you take a good look at the bugs and wishlist forums. MS's purported OS release history is irrelevant. SP2003 has already been bandied about. The mobile phone market is too short-termist to wait for traditional software development sluggishness, but that's another topic. This is a platform that needs all the positive PR it can get after the turbulent ride its had recently, and fixing the [commonly-called] 'bugs' would be a fair start. Oh, and its a poll... headed by a question that asks "should" not "will". Regards,
Guest Monolithix [MVP] Posted February 27, 2003 Report Posted February 27, 2003 I'll try to keep on topic as you seem very eager not to stray from the point you made Max. I voted yes as i do think that as paying customers to MS we are entitled to updates that will "fill in the gap's" in the current release. However if it takes a year to get it released (like SP1 for XP) then it will be of no use to me, as by that time my contract will have expired with Orange and i will be shopping around for a new handset (and contract probably, heh). How is see it; the problem mobile providers and Mircosoft, are dithering over what to do until the 3G rollout is complete. 2.5G is in a difficult position where it ~is~ testing out the prospect of 3G and all of its frills. The telco's just want to be in a "top of the range" position while MS needs the feedback from SP2k2 to uses use in its 3G platform, whether thats SmartPhone 2003, 2004 or whatever. In the end be pleased with what you have so far, improvments are always apreciated but to be honest i wouldn't hold your breath (sorry for drifting off topic again at the end there slightly...)
Guest Southwestwall Posted February 27, 2003 Report Posted February 27, 2003 Cheers for the feedback, its always good to see what other people think. I' m happy with straying from the point a bit, it was just that the last poster seemed to have some misconception and miss it somewhat :) I still think MS would do well to release an SP for the OS, despite their market positioning. They didn't leave PC OS users out in the cold between releases, so I don't see why they should do so with us. I would be happy with what I have if it was implemented better, or if not, I was in the position to improve it myself. If MS don't improve SP2002 then we are stuck with what we have. As you say, paying customers do expect their software to be complete. I don't see users paying for a service pack on this basis, so that would rule out a 3rd party doing it if they had to follow certification, and Orange are unlikely to subsidise it in a goodwill gesture... Maybe the ever enterprising developers will step into the breach over time - there have already been some good utilities and tools appearing. Its just a damned shame we have to decertify to use the best of them. A device is only as good as the software it runs. If the SPV fulfils its potential on this front, I will stick with it for some time to come. I am not one to be sorely tempted by new handsets - I only upgraded to an SPV as it was the first new phone for ages that wasn't a handbag toy. Regards,
Guest midnight Posted February 27, 2003 Report Posted February 27, 2003 erm, RCAM, sorry to correct you, but..... http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003...03/default.mspx (but yeh, this is the first time since winblows95 that microshaft have used an odd numbered os :) )
Guest Big Ron - No Longer a Mem Posted February 27, 2003 Report Posted February 27, 2003 Takes me back to the good old days of DR DOS. This time, it's WIN4SPs vs. Symbian. For thos too young to recall DOS (and judging by the "my first computer" thread, there look to be a lot; DR ducked out of writing DOS for the PC. NOT, as MS subsequently claimed, because their dilettante CEO was too busy playing with his plane, but mainly because of a one-sided Non-Disclosure Agreement that IBM insisted they sign prior to negotiations. MS wound up with a monopoly, and used it as a cash cow to fund other projects. Upgrades were desultory rather than inspired, and MSDOS 4 was a truly dreadful piece of code. Meanwhile DR had dusted off their contract wth IBM, and realised that it gave them the right to produce an O/S for anything IBM made - including PC's. So... they started asking PC users what the DIDN'T like about DOS, and what they DID like. (The former list was a LOT longer than the latter!) Then they turned the "wants/don't wants" list over to their programmers, and told 'em to get busy. DR DOS was a revelation. 90% of the things people HATED about MS DOS had been addressed. It was idiotproof. It used a menu-driven setup, with context-sensitive help. It wrote to disk differently - using the next free "virgin" space first, rather than overwriting (possibly accidentally) erased files first - with less fragmentation as a byproduct. It gave 50% more free RAM than MS DOS. It replaced "Edlin" with a program like Notepad. It even MULTITASKED better than Windows 3.0! And it started to grab market share from MS's cash-cow. General panic ensued at Redmond. A new, inadequately-tested MS DOS 5.0 was rushed into the shops, with most of the additional features of the rival kludged together to enable a claim of "equivalence". DR hadn't been sitting on their hands... they leapfrogged with an even better version. In their panic to catch up, MS pirated substantial amounts of code fom a "partner" (which should have been a warning to Sendo, surely?!) and wound up paying $120m in an out of court settlement. Bottom line... MS never DID manage to catch up, Instead they "realigned their pricing structure". The new structure for DOS-bundling PC manufacturers equated to a 20% price cut, PLUS a free copy of MS DOS for every copy of DR DOS that they didn't sell. The deepest pockets won - DR couldn't afford to pay people to take free copies of their product. Is there a lesson in the story? Probably yes: thank God for Symbian. It gives MS a rival with deep pockets who will set them a standard to match.
Guest Myke Posted February 27, 2003 Report Posted February 27, 2003 XBOX 2 is NOT coming out in 2004 oh and yes, MS needs an update BADLY!!!!!!!!
Guest Southwestwall Posted March 2, 2003 Report Posted March 2, 2003 Top tale Big Ron, not quite before my time... I remember tales of MS devilry as a boy. "...can never change its spots..." perhaps. We'll have to wait and see just how little they [MS] think of their SP2002 guinea-pigs. Regards,
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now