@Max Power: Sounds really disappointing. IMO they shouldn't have released it at all in this state. These are basic scenarios and the third party support isn't strong enough to make up for it.
"How confused do you have to be about what makes a product successful that you decide to copy the mistakes to ensure you don't miss anything?"
Why do you think they were mistakes? Do you think Apple would've been more successful if they'd focused on cramming in every feature from the start instead of on making a great core experience? Do you think the Windows Phone team would be happier now if instead of the reviews pretty much all being variants of "the core experience is great, but there are a lot of things missing", with varying amounts of emphasis on each, they were variants of "there are lots of features, but they all suck"? (a.k.a. Windows Mobile 6) I'd say the former is a lot easier to fix.
BTW, I've decided probably not to get a WP7 for my next phone (first smartphone). The reason is I'm interested in musical applications of the touch interface (synthesizers, etc.) and WP7 lacking an exposed native API (and IIRC XNA not even allowing direct sound buffer access) severely restricts the possibilities there. So at least that decision was definitely the wrong one for me, but I don't think it necessarily was (or wasn't) the wrong one for the team. We'll see!
W3bbo said:rhm said:*snip*
That's because native Win32 code isn't a pleasure to develop in.
I disagree with your "outside of games development" because you overlook iPhone/iPad and OS X development where the Cocoa API and ObjC environment present a modern OOP platform to build on with a strong class library to boot.
Apparently Windows CE/EC7 includes a version of Silverlight with a native C++ instead of managed API. I suspect this will be included with Windows 8 as well and will become the new recommended native UI toolkit for Windows, replacing USER32.DLL (as Direct2D/DirectWrite replaced GDI). They'll probably even rewrite the shell UI in it.
figuerres said:DCMonkey said:*snip*
How totally STUPID!!
I would think they would have .Net 4 and SIlverlight 4 on the thing.... now that would make for a very compelling device to code for.
While I'd also like to see support for managed Silverlight in Windows CE/EC, the existence of a native Silverlight API is interested in itself. I bet this will also be put into Windows 8 and they'll probably even build the W8 shell on it.
hotmail used to be a lot worse than gmail. It's come a long way in the last X years, and the Wave 4 changes look really tempting, but like others the giant ads (in this and in other Live software/services, like Messenger) are too off-putting. Email and IM are personal experiences and the ads feel like unwanted guests.
giovanni said:Ray7 said:*snip*
This is what I don't understand: if both phones connect to the internet extensively, why should the data plans be any different? The Kin has teenager targeting funtions while the iPhone can connect to Exchange and has a better browser (one can argue), but if they both use the same bandwidth, why should they pay a different price? Verizon always had expensive plans as well as A&TT, but I fail to see why the phone pricing is under question.
A fair critic to the phone pricing model is, in my opinion, the mail in rebate: it requires advancing the money and doing extra work at home to get it back. Not what I would call user friendly. But hey, that is what you get by choosing Verizon (always hated them and preferred Cingular or T-Mobile, but that is just my personal opinion).
"This is what I don't understand: if both phones connect to the internet extensively, why should the data plans be any different? The Kin has teenager targeting funtions while the iPhone can connect to Exchange and has a better browser (one can argue), but if they both use the same bandwidth, why should they pay a different price?"
From Verizon's perspective, they shouldn't; they're using the same resources. From the user's perspective, if one provides more value than the other at the same price, there's no reason to go with the other.
In other words (if we accept the reviewer's conclusion; I have no idea myself), this is really Microsoft's fault, not Verizon's. They made a phone that uses tons of bandwidth, but didn't manage to do enough with it to justify the added resource use. The mismatch between the functionality and Verizon's pricing is just a consequence of that.
Anyway, here's hoping any good aspects of this (like the Kin Studio, apparently) are somehow salvaged.