MS don't have a choice here - they need to get the market to move from Nokia to Lumia brand-names.
MS owns the Lumia brand-name, but the terms for what they bought from Nokia limits the rights to using the Nokia brand name on the Lumia devices to Dec 31, 2015.
Sep 06, 2014 at 11:59 PM
Intriguingly, on the upcoming Lumia 735 - the so-called "selfie phone" - the camera button appears to have been removed. It's still there on the upcoming 830, but not on the 735.
It will be interesting to see how a phone that is supposedly aimed squarely at opportunistic selfie-snaps, where you would think that quick access to the camera is desirable, will manage the task.
I think we need a new variant of Godwin's Law (look it up) where as soon as the name "Sinofsky" is mentioned, it marks the end of the thread... LOL.
On the 30mins vs 30days thing, personally, I am firmly in the 30mins camp.
I believe that if you can't get it after 30mins, there is something basically wrong with the UI.
Nevertheless, and purely as a single data-point, our main office did a trial for 30 days with both 8 and 8.1, with the same conclusion at the end of both... the cost to get our staff up to speed on the changed UI simply didn't justify the technical gains over W7.
I don't believe that is an atypical conclusion by business users, and this is what W9 will need to resolve if MS wants to retain its core business users.
I hope it comes with a "Hey Cortana, STFU" command.
I already find it annoying without Cortana, when I accidently press the windows button and the stupid phone starts demanding that I speak louder.
So, while many of us are still getting the virtual finger from carriers over the Cyan update, MS have already announced a "Denim" update.
One thing that caught my attention in the list of features, was a "Hey Cortana" voice activation for Cortana.
If this is built into a Lumia update, it raises the obvious question of how will the other WP mfgs deal with it?
People don't brag about the computer they use at work.
Agreed that the consumer market is critical to MS's future, and they can't afford to keep screwing it up, but they also can't afford to get their existing business core off-side in the process.
Where I work, we are all desktop systems (albeit now using things like Intel NUCs) with multiple large monitors, running Win7 to support a series of Windows-based line-of-business apps.
We trialled Win8 and Win8.1 but the objections and arguments that ensued, and the issues with re-training people, simply meant that it was more trouble than it was worth. Win7 works just fine for now, and we can wait until Win9.
However, if Win9 is also going to be a drama for us, or if MS makes upgrading from Win7 more difficult than it needs to be, then we'll be looking to phase out all of our desktop apps and go all web-based apps, just using enough client hardware to run a browser.
Now that there is a DP program, it is clear that there is no valid reason for the carriers to retain control of the OS updates.
But does anyone know if there is actually a valid reason why the carriers retain control of the update releases for firmware ?
It seems to me that this is just a case of the carriers injecting themselves into the process for no reason other than perhaps some cynical market control.
MS could easily take responsibility for running all of the tests that the carriers say they need to do, and hand them a compliance document to be rubber-stamped.
But instead, we get the non-stop crap from the carriers about needing to test, and then delaying the approval/release in a totally opaque process, that just makes MS look bad.
I'm convinced that the reason my own carrier is not releasing Cyan (even though they have acknowledged that they have it) is that all of their people are too busy getting ready of the next iPhone.
Sep 02, 2014 at 3:43 AM
@vesuvius: I still have nightmares of the great DOS 3.3 to 4.0 upgrade debacle.
We ended up skipping V4.x and waiting for V5 - the way V4 should have been.... LOL.