Skip to main content

Even if Windows 10 Mobile succeeded, Microsoft would still be pursuing a post-smartphone strategy

This is not some arbitrary claim pulled from thin air. Windows Chief Terry Myerson said as much when Microsoft watcher Mary Jo Foley asked him why Microsoft continues releasing builds for the platform when it had just one percent market share.

Terry Myerson on stage at Build 2017

Terry Myerson on stage at Build 2017 (Image credit: Windows Central)

Terry replied:

Technically, there are...two things...unique about Windows Mobile. One is cellular connectivity and the other....ARM processors…both…have a role in the technical landscape of the future.So we're going to continue to invest in ARM and cellular. And while I'm not saying what type of device...we'll see...Windows devices, that use ARM chips...that have cellular connectivity. When you stop investing in these things, it's super hard to restart.When you're investing into growth, it's easier, but when you're investing for technical strategy...sometimes people can question it...especially among your readers.

I know using a platform you love, in which a company's only interest is to maintain technical relevance for future devices is an awkward position to be in.

It's also difficult for some fans to accept that this positioning of Windows 10 Mobile invariably suggests that the OS will be allowed to die (just like its Windows-on-mobile predecessors) once it fulfills its current purpose.

Microsoft's no longer trying to advance Windows 10 Mobile in the market, but it was only part of the company's mobile strategy anyway.

Windows (on) phone isn't dead - and may never die

Still in the game

Though Windows 10 Mobile's approaching an end, Myerson provided the consolation that just as previous iterations of Windows-on-mobile died and were followed by another OS, there will be a successor.

Myerson's reference to future devices, coupled with CEO Satya Nadella's acknowledgment of the same as recently as May assures us that Microsoft will not be abandoning mobile when Windows 10 Mobile is no more.

This is reassuring, and bittersweet for those who enjoy Microsoft's platform. After years of struggles, Windows phone fans must brace for Windows 10 Mobile's demise. The potential for something better, presumably in the form of full Windows 10 on ARM on form-shifting ultramobile PCs does, however, point a way forward.

Still, would Microsoft be pursuing such an ambitious post-smartphone strategy if Windows 10 Mobile had not failed? Yes, I believe it would.

Stay the course

A look back to the 1990's at Pocket PCs reveals Microsoft has always envisioned Windows on a pocketable device. Every iteration of the platform on mobile devices has been an attempt to achieve that dream. Pocket PC, Windows Mobile, Windows Phone and now Windows 10 Mobile have all had varying degrees of success but have all ultimately failed.

Ideally, OneCore, (where technically Windows 10 Mobile and Windows 10 are both simply Windows) would have given Windows 10 Mobile an edge.

On paper Windows 10 Mobile, because of the Universal Windows Platform (UWP), would have been a beneficiary of apps designed for Windows 10 with minor tailoring for the small screen. It would have also been (on paper) simultaneously developed with Windows 10 thereby reaping the benefits of the evolution of the platform.

Microsoft's goal has always been one Windows on all form factors.

Finally, the familiarity of Windows 10 among consumers was supposed to make Windows 10 Mobile both more familiar and appealing to the masses. None of this happened as planned.

Still, Microsofts vision has always been one Windows on all form factors. And when I say Windows, I mean Windows, not the pseudo version that is Windows 10 Mobile. This is why Microsoft continued pursuing ways to get full Windows on smaller, lighter, ARM-based, cellular-connected devices despite the fact Windows 10 Mobile existed.

I believe that Microsoft acknowledges Windows 10 Mobile as an achievement, but not a full realization of the Windows on all form factors dream.

So am I saying that Windows 10 Mobile was merely a transitory OS on the way to full Windows on a pocketable device? No, I am not.

Windows 10 Mobile and full Windows on ARM, dynamic duo

I believe Microsoft's plan "A," if Windows 10 Mobile had succeeded, was to continue its implementation on smartphones (and small tablets) for as long as the smartphone market thrived.

Microsoft hoped Windows 10 Mobile would be a successful third smartphone platform besides Android and iOS.

This would have ensured a market presence, mindshare and a growing ecosystem while Microsoft continued with the other phase of its mobile strategy. Smartphones weren't the end game folks.

Full Windows on ARM is the route to Windows on all form factors; something Windows 10 Mobile on smartphones had not achieved. Though it is Windows, Windows 10 Mobile never had full parity with Windows PCs.

Making PCs pocketable, not cramming full Windows on phones

It's important to understand that this facet of what I believe was Microsoft's original mobile plan was not a redundancy. There was no attempt to bring full Windows to "phones." Microsoft had Windows 10 Mobile for phones.

Full Windows on ARM is not an attempt to bring full Windows to phone.

It is, however, an attempt to optimize Windows on cellular-connected hardware to a point where PCs could be moved into smaller mobile form factors with the addition of telephony.

Unique PC form factors, on pocketable devices with Continuum and context-conforming CShell I believe has long been Microsoft's goal.

Skype sets a precedence for making phone calls on PCs.

I know it's challenging for some readers to visualize the difference between this and bringing full Windows to a phone. The simplest way to put it is to consider the starting point.

Microsoft's not starting with a smartphone and cramming a PC OS onto it and calling it a PC. It's starting with a PC, optimizing it for ARM and cellular connectivity and giving it a form-factor that is pocketable while adding phone attributes such as telephony, and acknowledging it as what it is, a PC.

This analysis is consistent with Joe Belfiore's statement that full Windows on ARM is for PC's and not phones. The device I'm describing is a PC.

What could have been

I believe if Windows 10 Mobile had succeeded Microsoft would've had two telephony capable mobile devices on the market: smartphones running Windows 10 Mobile and ultramobile PCs running full Windows on ARM. If this scenario had played out, Microsoft's first-party aspirational devices for each category would have been reference points for OEM partners.

Smartphones running Windows 10 Mobile would have been the more affordable of the device types. Ultramobile PCs would command a premium price. Microsoft's long-term goal, I believe, would have been for form-shifting ultramobile PCs to represent the future-in-the-present as the one device that could be all devices: smartphone, small tablet, and PC via Continuum.

Microsoft's representation in the market with the current device paradigm, smartphones, while also positioning what it believes to be their natural successor, ultramobile PCs, would have been a strategic advantage for Microsoft.

Salvaging what's left and doing their best

Since Windows 10 Mobile failed I believe Microsoft's still pursuing its full Windows on ARM on ultramobile PC strategy. It's just doing so without the benefits a successful smartphone platform would have added to the equation. It's also gleaning all it can from Windows 10 Mobile and its users before allowing it to die.

Science fiction foreshadows new technologies.

Science fiction foreshadows new technologies.

This push forward with part of its mobile plan after Windows 10 Mobile's failure may seem desperate, even foolhardy to some. But regardless of the success of its cross-platform efforts and integration of rival platforms in its Microsoft Graph (opens in new tab), without its own mobile play, Microsoft's relevance in personal computing would continue to diminish. Microsoft has to do something, which is why they would've been pursuing a post-smartphone strategy with Windows 10 Mobile or not.

Jason L Ward is a columnist at Windows Central. He provides unique big picture analysis of the complex world of Microsoft. Jason takes the small clues and gives you an insightful big picture perspective through storytelling that you won't find *anywhere* else. Seriously, this dude thinks outside the box. Follow him on Twitter at @JLTechWord. He's doing the "write" thing!

69 Comments
  • I don't think Microsoft put any effort into the success of Windows 10 mobile and it showed. In fact it seemed like they did everything to make it fail more than anything.
  • What would you have them do?
    Short of paying Samsung and Hauwei to make a phone.
  • Admit failure and move on. Out of the mobile market.
  • At that point when they do, will you then have said goodbye to the problem that's keeping you from succeeding in life?
  • But people chasing for phones that attract more malware is alway good. 
  • Windows attracts the most malware.
  • windows xp, 7 attract malware because they are 10+ years old. 
  • nobody ever said they won. and their aim was 3rd place from the beginning. being late to market doesn't open many gates. they did become third and not a bad percentaige. they pulled the plugs themselves becouse bounded mobile OSs are not real and they don't have a future. you would not say google is failing, or would you? because they are doing the exact same thing. android is getting butchered to make chrome their main OS. they know mobile OS  is doomed. i wonder what will you say about that. now lets get to failiours apple and google wont let go of. chrome os. pixel, google plus, gmail. mac os, ipad, mac book. suddenly barking under the wrong tree doesn't work anymore righ? now go away and don't waist other peoples time until you actually know something mr. gamo62.
  • Almost everything you listed is doing just fine. If you think they are all failures, then you just really not like Surface. Surface is no where near as successful as most everything you mentioned.
  • They bothered advertising and courting devs during the WP7-WP8.1 days. By the time WP8.1.2 came (April 2015), they more or less gave up courting devs (aside for more modern versions of Facebook, Messenger and Instagram)
  • They could have released new Lumia phones for one thing. They could have at least made all Microsoft Windows apps for the Windows Phone good as the ones they making for iOS and Android.  They could have at least said what their future plans are. There is a lot things they could have done...
  • It's not the platform that failed. It's the big developers that couldn't bring their software into the platform because of various ($$$) reasons. I would even say the platform succeeded to the point it hurt itself. I see a lot of people using W8.1 just because it is very reliable system - it is cheap, easy to use and it just works. Unfortunately it's not for "social media" people. MS is huge player and they know exactly what they're doing. They have proven it a lot of times and customers hating MS becasue they don't understand what's going on won't change that.  
  • There is absolutely no evidence that MS knows "exactly what they're doing" when it comes to mobile. There is a decade and a half of failure that would prove otherwise.
  • people like you thought bringing pc to homes was a stupid idea. when Microsoft did it you didn't even notice. you just got in line. you are just another normal user, unaware of things that happen around you. how do you think Microsoft took all the cloud and ended google? nobody knows how or why. thats why you are a simple employee and Microsoft is a billion dollar company. they know things that you don't.
  • I might be simple, but you are a fool if you don't regonize Microsofts total failure in mobile. Apparently, they don't know everything.
  • MS expects consumers to buy into their product/vision because they made it. Consumers follow the crowd and what's shiny. MS after decades in business still don't understand consumers aka norms.
  • Not only did they not release any more phones, they even stopped developing Windows 10 Mobile altogether.
  • """Microsoft's vision has always been one Windows on all form factors"""
    All these problems started with the insider program.
    The world outcry proved that the masses wanted Windows 7.
    Too much resources were spent on Windows desktop than ever before.
    All this anniversary, creators etc updates was an over kill that took away human resource away from Mobile.
  • Dear Jason, I generally love your articles, their thoroughness and your writing, but this one leaves me frustrated and confused. 1. When you ask, "Still, would Microsoft be pursuing such an ambitious post-smartphone strategy if Windows 10 Mobile had not failed?," I would say that Microsoft did NOT *observe* Windows 10 Mobile fail in the marketplace; it never really introduced it to the marketplace to see whether it WOULD thrive or fail--an unfinished, buggy OS, with signature features removed just before shipping, on unspectacular hardware, available in very limited quantities, in limited locations and networks, with no marketing! It seems more like they had either given up or already set their sights on something beyond it, even before introducing it. 2. Please explain the difference between "smartphones running Windows 10 Mobile and ultramobile PCs running full Windows on ARM." Clearly they're both pocketable, touch-enabled devices. What is THE differentiating criterion between a smartphone and an ultramobile PC with telephony? Is it a different hardware requirement in terms of clock speed, RAM, storage, pen support, GPU capability, x86-type bus or processor interrupt structure, what? (Given Windows' history of being compiled to run of very different processors, I don't think that Windows source code is that closely coupled to processor architecture.) Microsoft has said again and again that they realized that the phones in their pockets really were full-fledged PCs, and that was what was in their pockets some years ago. I don't understand what disqualifies today's smartphone hardware, and I would really appreciate your reply (though I understand that that may require a separate, full-length article and not just a comment reply).
  • Sorry, that was meant to be a reply to Jason, but I can't figure out how to delete or edit the message (neither in the app nor via browser). I don't know how it got here, but I've reposted under Jason's comment, hoping he will see it.
  • No need, some good points
  • I think the difference between windows 10 mobile and windows 10 on arm with telophony is a matter of branding and prespecitive.  Ultimately, they weill do the same things, but I think Jason is arguing that they will position and brand it as a computer first, rather than a phone firts: even though it's the same.  I think they have bad PR/branding in the phone market but succuess with the Surface and IoT that they can just position it differently. Mass consumers aren't that bright or they just don't care.  If you are here, then you are more in tuned with the sublties and strategies. 
  • Correct, Mobile is an edition of Windows 10.
    Each edition is identical irrespective of form factor.
    Windows 10S cannot replace Windows 10 Home.
    Windows on ARM can't replace Windows 10 Mobile
  • Thanks for reading folks!!! As I've been presenting in my ongoing analysis Windows 10 Mobile is I believe will be subsumed by full Windows on ARM. This will be a realization as I've stated above, of the Windows on all form factors vision. Windows 10 Mobile as a lesser and somewhat different iteration of Windows, though on a shared core simply did not achieve that. There are no guarantees of success but I think the way forward with full Windows on ARM is a continuation of the company's original plan, without the success of Windows 10 Mobile.
  • Jason, it remains debateable if Windows has actually succeeded in tablet form.
    Having Windows on ARM phone will not change anything.
    Windows 10 Mobile is not the problem, the problem is Windows.
    When apps leave the store, they leave desktop too.
  • Dear Jason, I generally love your articles, their thoroughness and your writing, but this one leaves me frustrated and confused. 1. When you ask, "Still, would Microsoft be pursuing such an ambitious post-smartphone strategy if Windows 10 Mobile had not failed?," I would say that Microsoft did NOT *observe* Windows 10 Mobile fail in the marketplace; it never really introduced it to the marketplace to see whether it WOULD thrive or fail--an unfinished, buggy OS, with signature features removed just before shipping, on unspectacular hardware, available in very limited quantities, in limited locations and networks, with no marketing! It seems more like they had either given up or already set their sights on something beyond it, even before introducing it. 2. Please explain the difference between "smartphones running Windows 10 Mobile and ultramobile PCs running full Windows on ARM." Clearly they're both pocketable, touch-enabled devices. What is THE differentiating criterion between a smartphone and an ultramobile PC with telephony? Is it a different hardware requirement in terms of clock speed, RAM, storage, pen support, GPU capability, x86-type bus or processor interrupt structure, what? (Given Windows' history of being compiled to run of very different processors, I don't think that Windows source code is that closely coupled to processor architecture.) Microsoft has said again and again that they realized that the phones in their pockets really were full-fledged PCs, and that was what was in their pockets some years ago. I don't understand what disqualifies today's smartphone hardware, and I would really appreciate your reply (though I understand that that may require a separate, full-length article and not just a comment reply).
  • I think the difference between windows 10 mobile and windows 10 on arm with telophony is a matter of branding and prespecitive.  Ultimately, they weill do the same things, but I think Jason is arguing that they will position and brand it as a computer first, rather than a phone firts: even though it's the same.  I think they have bad PR/branding in the phone market but succuess with the Surface and IoT that they can just position it differently. Mass consumers aren't that bright or they just don't care.  If you are here, then you are more in tuned with the sublties and strategies. 
  • Windows on ARM isn't for phones. It is going to be mainly tablets and laptops. Microsoft confirmed this last week. They have a new platform coming for phones.
  • It does not matter the mobile is dying
  • There is absolutly nothing to backup your statement. In fact mobile isn't going anywhere soon.
  • Yeah Fernando unfortunately Windows 10 Mobile as I've been saying for months is going to die and be replaced by Microsoft's next attempt just as it's predecessors.😕
  • Fernando,  windows mobile is dying...wait...it's dead.  I think thats what monkeys is saying...if not...they have no idea what they are talking about.
  • I don’t buy it. If Windows 10 Mobile would be sitting at say 10% marketshare vs 1% Microsoft would continue to invest and push forward with it. They simple responded to how the market did. A failure to move forward with the next big idea. How many roboots have we seen really? They tried and didn’t make it. Now would they have eventually ended up here working more in an ARM like device? Sure why not. It’s an evolution, one that I’m more than happy to see how it turns out. But there again my original point is they would have not laid off the staff and resources to make Windows 10 mobile more prominent if the market responded to iPhone like numbers. 
  • Hi Puritan i said as much in the piece under what could have been: What could have been I believe if Windows 10 Mobile had succeeded Microsoft would've had two telephony capable mobile devices on the market: smartphones running Windows 10 Mobile and ultramobile PCs running full Windows on ARM. If this scenario had played out, Microsoft's first-party aspirational devices for each category would have been reference points for OEM partners. Smartphones running Windows 10 Mobile would have been the more affordable of the device types. Ultramobile PCs would command a premium price. Microsoft's long-term goal, I believe, would have been for form-shifting ultramobile PCs to represent the future-in-the-present as the one device that could be all devices: smartphone, small tablet, and PC via Continuum. Microsoft's representation in the market with the current device paradigm, smartphones, while also positioning what it believes to be their natural successor, ultramobile PCs, would have been a strategic advantage for Microsoft.
  • Poppycock. WAY too little too late.
  • This article reads (to me at least) in part like oh poor little MS... They tried hard but they just couldn't get the mobile platform going ( I know this really isn't what the article says or means) but I just feel like.. The mobile device could have been very successful in third place... If MS themselves didnt pull te plug... They didn't wait to see if their advancements in the platform would have seen an increase in users... They just randomly pulled out of every market they were in..... I really love the Win10Mobile OS...i wish they themselves would have been as committed and diehard as some of the windows mobile fans are....its a truly fantastic platform...for all its bugs...
  • the third place wasn't all that bad but they pulled the plug. as they did with ms watch for 2 reasons. 1. because there was no way to put a real OS on them. 2. because they know some of these markets are irrelevant, childish and with probability to die soon. for exacmple. how many times have you checked the time with your wrist watch? i didn't do it even for once even when i wear it, i use my laptop or phone. wrist watches are useless and smart ones are just for showing off. and i don't even bother checking my vitals on watch or phone. another example is phones. phones are very old inventions. these days they may be portable and have some little games on them, but they still are phones. you can't do practical things with them. when smart glasses come, you wont need to use your hands for everything. there is always a watch on the side and you don't have to keep your phone beside your head while calling people. glasses are around your head. no danger in driving. remember HoloLens? with the phone market gone, special thing are going to happen. and i sense we are more near to it than we ever thought.
  • I totally agree with that.
    The only thing I never understood about their strategy is the failure of w10m... Because this failure wasn t one before they released a buggy w10m and stopped releasing smartphones as soon as the bugs were fixed.
    Looks like they just wanted it to fail in order to have a reason to leave the market... And that's sad as the future of windows would have benefited from more apps that it would have brought... I know the future isn t apps, but it would certainly help the transition.
  • Looks like they just wanted it to fail in order to have a reason to leave the market
    Was obvious the way they flung around the word "retrenchment" like they were giving out sweets.....
  • Windows 10 Mobile didn't fail.  Microsoft failed Windows 10 Mobile.
  • Well said, sir.
  • One more thing.  users failed Windows 10 Mobile, not microsoft .  Its market and way people do things changed throught the tide.  more and more users want to play with phones, not use phones.   Microsoft strategy is to put PC in pocket for prodoctive. while users chasing for entertainment in pockets now.  People get hit by airplanes, fall off mountains for selfie, hit on pole when walking looking at insgtram.  Babies dont need toysrus anymore, they need ipads.   The release of andorid and ipnones with colorful background and joyful icons changed the way people like phones.  I guess most people heard about this young man cut his kidney to buy iphone.   This is how world change.  Microsoft did not failed Windows 10 Mobile.
  • Lol, you've bested the iSheep.
  • WOW BYU1.....That is the most wacked out logic about a product failure.   MICROSOFT made windows 10 moible fail....NO ONE ELSE.  If you don't put out a compelling product, market it,  and make it available to the users...HOW IS IT GOING TO SUCCEED?   It was not the people who bought and used windows mobile/phone products.  Like myself....who microsoft failed btw.  since I bought a windows phone 6.5,7,8 and gave up on 10 because they kept NOT supporting my deivces which were able to move to 10.  So....THINK BEFORE YOU TYPE next time!
  • windows mobile 6 was release in 2007.  windows phone 8 was released 2012.  Those hardware are already too old.   They wold not chase up current LTE speed, mobile computing speed.   New technology released evey week.  how long do you keep your current phones?   10+ year?  Its sad to see things get old.   can you make technology development slow down?   say 'yes we can'.     
  • It wasn't easy.  It has to take CEO to do it.
  • And it all started when Nadella replaced Ballmer.  At least Ballmer wanted Windows Phone to succeed. Nadella doesn't seem to give a s**t about it.
  • Microsoft didn't do anything for Windows phone 8.. all the marketing and app development was done by nokia. Nokia camera was one of the finest . Nokia 1020 is still unbeatable.Lumia 520 was a huge hit. What happened after that?
  • What happened after that?  Nokia is not doing too well.  Microsoft  sold nokia and released windows mobile but market share is already too low.
  • I don't believe that if MS had succeeded with W10M they would've had two telephony capable mobile devices on the market: smartphones running Windows 10 Mobile and ultramobile PCs running full Windows on ARM. I still think they would have merged them into one as they are doing it now under CShell. There woud have been no point for them to maintain 2 separate branches of the same OS. As far as I can see everything is going according to their long term plan.    
  • Is it mandated every article has to have pictures of that stupid Westworld phone? Just curious. Also, maybe wait til Microsoft has one mobile product that doesn't fail before positing if they would endorse two different mobile product lines?
  • "assures us that Microsoft will not be abandoning mobile" Meanwhile, we've got plenty of examples where Microsoft will just reverse course and pull out of a market without warning, which is what mobile looks like right now anyway. Remember when Kinect WAS Xbox One? What is it now? Legacy garbage with no point of attention in XB1X. Remember the Nokia acquisition and the Lumia brand? Is ANYTHING left from that $7.5 billion disaster? I have no faith we'll get another phone because I have no faith in Nadella's claims they're not done. They've sat on this even longer than they sat on a flagship on AT&T (which was 3 years). Until I see a phone, there are no words from Microsoft that will convince me they're making a phone, especially something as pathetically tepid as "I'm sure we'll make more."
  • Mobile has always been the "abused red-headed stepchild" at Microsoft. Actions don't lie.....
  • If they just did not kill Nokia mobile department. Just that would be enough and current even W10 situation would look so much different!
  • Microsoft would have been in a far better position maintaining even just 5% of the mobile market with W10M while continuing the W10 on Arm and OneCore strategy. Of course fans would complain bitterly about yet another reboot when their devices got left behind, but clear communication about why would be better than total capitulation. Apple has been smart enough to keep OSX going despite it being overshadowed by iOS and Microsoft long ago winning the desktop war. Apple understands desktop is an essential part of their ecosystem.
  • Good article Jason. Enjoyed reading it and I fully understand the point of view. I look forward to when I will replace me Elite x3 with a new Windows device. Whatever that form factor may be.
  • Care factor - zero. I'm going to buy the Nokia flagship that comes out later this year, they're the only reason I moved across to WP and they'll be the reason I leave.
  • Just because you're skating to where the puck isn't, doesn't mean you're skating to where the puck will be.
  • when nokia was in charge there was promotion, sales, they had a small percentage. When microsoft took over they just did a silent release. no ads, no promotions no nothing. How can you get a share with these non existence sales marketing?They didnt even try.
  • Microsoft was wrapping a $100 bill around each Lumia sold in terms of Market Development Funds.  They were losing tons of money on it.
  • The problem Jason, with windows 10 mobile, was that it had not succeed because of MS itself. You cannot expect a platform to be well received when you release a half baked buggy OS. We all remember how pathetic win10mo was when the X50s were launched. Poor design, lots of bugs, misplaced objects etc. So, I do not see how MS even though about win10mo succeding when they were not even offering a stable product. Even now, when you swipe from the home screen to the right, to the App List screen, the delay is still there, a poor implementation. The People hub, with the round contact profile pictures is another thing many have complained because the OS is havinga a square based design: tiles, yet the People  hub and tile are messed up. The notification center/control center lack any sort of nice blur effect. BT and Wifi poor performance since forever, VPN settings without a Send All Traffic switch as it should be and as all other mobile OSes have. VPN L2TP failing to connect when being setup specifically to L2TP, tried it with two VPN providers. So, maybe if they would have delivered a fast, reliable and with a little better design mobile OS, maybe, things would have been diffferent. But when you launch a broken OS on new devices, you cannot expect any positive feedback from media, bloggers, reviewers and users.
  • Once my Lumia 950 dies, I am picking up an iphone. Bad day for me. But no choice. Only when Microsoft confirms that it has that ultimate OS that runs in the smartphones AND gets updated properly for more than 2 years, I will return back. Until then, I will not even suggest people to buy a Lumia or Surface phone. An Android or an iPhone. But definitely not a Windows whatever-on-mobile.
  • Reflections on what MS is doing based on vague comments from their leadership or imagening what would have been can be interesting; however, for many of us who enjoy their mobile UI, we want something simpler and more concrete. Will the device I own and love gain improved existing features? Will it gain new features? Will a range of new options be available for upgrade when mine begins to age or I want to step into a different tier of price/features? Generally, the answers to all these appear to be no. We now have a possible date of 2018 being floated for some sort of new device. Even if that were to actually materialize and not slip into 2019 or 2020, there's no guarantee we won't have another hololens/band/etc or that the new non-phone Ultimate Mobile Unicorn will even be affordable for most of us. So, someday in the unknown future MS may successfully release a new mobile-esque product that I may or may not be able to immediately afford. More simply still, everyone has to choose: Switch platforms now or ride your MS device into the ground and then switch.
  • No surprises from WIndows Central, as always always negative. Understandable I guess. WIndows let us all down. Having had Windows Phones from WIndows Mobile 6 then 6.5 > 7 > 8.0 & 8.1 currently with Windows 10 on both Lumia 950 & my wife's Lumia 735 I can truly say that when these two phones go "belly up" I will probably leave Windows. Sad as we really liked the OS and were realy comfortable with it. I enjoyed how everything Synced so well between Phone, PC, Laptop etc. But when I found out my Lumia 820 would not work with Windows 10 and my daughter's 535 GPS would not connect I started to feel quite foolish, as though I was being taken advatage of. It was sort of like a "D" ride at Disneyworld. I have spent enough already and realize Microsoft realy does not care about their customers or so it seems. So while it was some ride, I guess I"ll be getting off at the next station. Sad I am.
  • I am so looking forward to to have a full Windows exp on a 6" screen where I can't even put my finger on the start button because it is so small, process some RAW files in a real editor like lightroom or DXO where I likely can't even see the slider.  Maybe even play some Civilization while we're at it.  /s
  • Glasses are just another screen.  Just like the watch.  They will never have all the capability/battery life etc as the phone.  Plus people are hesitant to have a separate cellular connection due to billing etc.   At best Glasses are an accessory.  I can never see them getting past 10% attach rate. As an accessory they don't need a big heavy O/S.  Its just another diversion for Microsoft like IoT that will die on the vine...  
  • Personally I believe the 2 screen home with tiles on one and stupid app layout on other killed windows phone. If they had opted for something like normal people do as in Android and iOS many users would have chose due to the same familiarity and developers would have eventually come. Another reason Satya.
  • Apple ,the inventor of the modern smartphone has only 11% market share after 10 years , Microsoft the inventor of the modern PC OS still commends an 85% market share after 40 years on Windows . Those are core businesses for each companies and it would seem that Microsoft did fairly well. Now W10 mobile is still supported with updates , and thus is far from dead . It will probably never die at least not until Microsoft has something better to replace it .
  • by doing this MS just handed over majority of personal device market. No matter what they do to PC, MS is losing volumes of users, developers, apps. I can not imagine MS can retake the position, they had before. PC with Windows will be more and more some advanced platform, used only by certain segment. That is becoming obvious, if we look at apps, developed for windows store.