Intel exec hints that it could re-enter the mobile processor business again

I don't want to hear your opinion, so I won't ask. But X86 is not practical for small screens. It becomes useful with continuum almost exclusively, or command line programs. Have you never used VT-100 on Android? Incredibly useful and there are many other awesome command line programs. It would be so easy to whip up an x86, console application and run it on your phone...As a developer, I can't imagine just how easy it would be to write little programs for this and that. I never got into Eclipse or writing Java, not because I don't like Java, but because I just have more experience with C++. And I have a lot of awesome console applications which have already been written in C++ that I could simply recompile and boom.. I can now do things like crack WEP passwords and all kind of neat stuff. Best part? I can sit down at my Monitor, running visual studio from my phone, compile a quick console application, and run it. Or use my existing code base. It would get me tinkering with Windows phone simply because of that. You can say what you want, but to ask people to code for ARM, you're asking a bunch of coders to learn Java. Many know it, its not hard to learn, but the fact is, they know C# and C++ and other things which have a lot of compiling options from X86.   For example, who knows Objective-C? Only iPhone coders mostly, and even now, they are ditching Objective-C. Good thing I didn't waste my time. They are appealing to a lot of coders, why? Because they are the final hold outs. The people who didn't or don't want to learn a language exclusively for the purpose of writing a phone app.   If you are complaining how the screen is too small, then you are thinking too narrow and probably can only think up uses which are indeed impractical. I'd never run photoshop or visual studio on my 5.5" screen. It needs projected to a PC Monitor with a keyboard and mouse. To be able to have the dynamic flexibility to project that desktop to any screen I encounter, that is what this is brining. To see that dream, we need evelopers. To get developers, we need cool stuff like PC<->Phone compatibility with applications.

With Project Astoria cancelled, there is no Java on Microsoft's ARM based OS. And if you already know C#, why not add some of your little cool utilities into a UWP canvas and deploy to WIndows store today?

close, its not a phone or anything like we know now. It will be a new categorie device. It could be more something like The Courier we have seen before. You could Do More on this device anything we have seen before and it has the Cortana 2.0 which is supersmart. MS showed us this smart assistant in a Hololens demo before, but nowbody seem to notice this as everybody was impressed by the hololens. They spoke on intelligence at build before and we know they are already have showed something like this live on tv in China. Cant find the youtube link for now. It will be a surprise act like they did with the hololens. It will be release a year after the anouncement so developers can develop for it. It will be bots, which they allready anounced at build, but the will show never seen before possibilities on the new device. So, this is it, but I could be wrong :-)

Holy crap I saw that demo multiple times in the past but only now I am noticing the assistant. That is awesome! Almost Jarvis-like. Probably too good to be true but still, pretty neat if they were working on this yes. Posted via the Windows Central App for Android

Yeah maybe too good to be true, but they also did de hololens surprise act. All of the different technique used in this incredible peace of never seen device I had allready seen seperately in demos of the microsoft research team, but not combined in one device, so I could never know what they where up to. So now I'm following the next thing and that is artificial intelligence. They have shown us lots of features, but none of them connected. They could be working on some new disrupting device and I know they can do it. btw this is the chinese AI wheather reporter I was talking about. Pretty impressive.

Surface is just a brand. Even if they bring a Surface phone on to the market. Consumers wont want to own one. Just like I don't want the Hp Elite X3. I love my Lumia 950 Xl but getting tired of not having apps. A surface phone probably wont be any diferent. Even if it has the best build quality and good looks.

Who knows, maybe it will come with 16 million apps :)

It's not going to go from the current marketshare to 10% in one phone release, but they have to (re)start somewhere. Also, don't equate you not wanting the HP Elite X3 to no consumers ever wanting it or the surface phone if/when it comes out. Your preferences do not generalize to everyone else.

I think there is a difference between this and scorpio however. With the scorpio, the only people they are going up against are themselves essentially and sony. They didn't have partners persay. Notifying people of a surface phone months in advance would piss off the likes of HP and others who might be considering making a windows phone, as people who might be prospective clients might now hesitate on purchasing a phone. The surface line isn't meant to dominate, it's to lead by example. A long tail between announcement and availability would run counter to that ideology.

Even if the surface phone was to be announced, it wouldn't scare away potential manufacturers since every manufacturer has theur own market. The elite x3 is being sold in more countries than the lumia 950. The Nuans and others like it are only available in distinct markets. The surface devices are available in how many countries? 12?   The robust distribution network Nokia had has been dismantled so what will MS use to distribute the phones to all 195+ countries?

It will happen, the only question is wether this is 1 or 5 years ahead of us.

It looks like they never really officially left. Its just that the chips weren't impressive enough to bother. We'll probably see a new mobile chip late next year or 2.

Gosh ! this can make my beast live again , x86 SURFACE PHONE. 

I know right? ;)

Why x86? It should be x64, we need more RAM

No matter, 32 bit or 64 bit, it's still an x86 instruction set

One step at a time aye?

You don't want pure x64 processors

There is no such thing as x64 processors from Intel now. Intel 64bit processors was the Itanium processors which didn't sell well, so the replacement was the x86-64 which are the x86 based processors with the 64bit extension, which was developed by AMD. real 64bit processors at the moment are the IBM Power and SUN (Oracle) SPARC processors.

Hush, hush... Next time we'll have people on Windows Central demanding PPC phones!

Maybe this is why we are now hearing Surface Phone at the end of 2017 instead of spring which is what we were initially hearing.

Yep... not at this year's October announcement, but maybe next year. Enjoy the HP Elite x3, or Acer Jade Primo until then.

Or Alcatel Idol 4S with W10?

Its still live only in leaks. 

Wrong. We are hearing from Surface Phone at least since I got my 920. And guess what. It never came. Everyone forgets so fast in here (or doesnt want to remember).

I think they mean the 'latest' rumor about the phone. We remember the fake promises and disappointments.

I doubt it, considering the time it takes from design to manufacturing of a new chip it's probably a couple of years away. Intel really needs to do something different here too, so who knows if they even stick to the X86 design for their new mobile chip For the Surface Phone the only benefit will be running X86 apps when connected to a screen, something a very small percentage of users actually care about. I never heard from a "common" smartphone user about that as something they're missing.  

The x86 phone won't be built for the 'common' phone users.  It is for the business or enterprise users who would run the converted Win32 apps natively rather than the virtualized Win32 apps as HP x3 would.  Surface Phone is rumored to have three variants.  The top end model is a powerful business phone which could use a x86 processor.  MS and Intel might be working together to build a new x86 mobile processor for the future Surface Phones.

Who says that they are beginning with design only now? They ditched the mentioned chips, but maybe there was a parallel development. Apart that, I still can't see why one would need a x86 chip in a small device. The "light" usage is already possible, and those applications which do not run as UWP generally are high power requirement applications anyway (CAD, Photoshop, Video editing etc) and will not make much sense running on a small device, even when connected to a big screen. And all this myriad of x86 progs which do easy things should rather be ported to UWP anyway, and in many cases there is already an app who can do this.

People arent buying Windows Phones in their current state so something has to change. MS could change tracks and sell PC Phones, devices that work as a phone but also work as a PC, Surface Phone will most likely be this however concept is very expensive with x86 at it's core & as you say any new mobile x86 Intel chip is years away, not to mention the storage requirements, PC phones with M2 SSD drives would be necessary. The smart thing to do would be allow Win32 on Arm apps to be built so MS could still make use of Arm phone hardware but it now has application parity with x86 PC's so long as the dev complies a version to run on Arm. Intel could also push out their Arm CPU designs for mobile, sort of a resurrection of the old Wintel alliance if PC Phones gain any traction.

Microsoft needs to ditch the high end and go back to the low end where the Lumia line actually grew. There aren't enough enterprise users that would ever buy a $1k phone, most enterprises go byod and let users bring in their iphones, it's a win win. Users get hardware they love, enterprise cuts hardware costs.

I think MS should cater both high-end to serve as the best reference device for the platform like what Surface did and cater lower-end nor mid-range to stretch the reach for more markets where iPhone have little influence and where the competition still have room. OEM is always welcome to fill all the gaps. It's really up to MS to make W10M compelling outside to most consumers. Mobile is very important market to miss. Weather we like it or not, having something over there keeps the brand be known to average people and keep the ecosystem intact. Desktop-class PC won't go away and the future is MR, but smartphones will be a big thing for a very long time if not permanent.

I'm not sure if what you mean here is the same concept as UWA, but it sounds like it to me.

While common smartphone users don't request that, it is my observation (from a limited vantage point) that Enterprises and even small businesses are seeking alternatives to Win32 line of business apps on x86 laptops. And the vendor channels are supplying iPad-centric solutions with great success still, which I believe is due to the momentum in that direction before comparable x86 tablets were readily available. Ex: Dell Venue 8 Pro, which I'm now noticing doesn't seem to offer a Win10 version even. [Edit: I've been corrected on that last point.] Allow me to reply to myself to supply two examples I'm seeing locally.

Ex1: TekServ, an Apple-centric repair and sales shop in NYC had ads I kept hearing in podcasts declaring how it had successfully helped a local cable company migrate its field technicians from laptops to iPads. In my mind this is a huge blow to MS/Intel. And this is despite the need to invest in iOS software and training, and despite the lack of integrated enterprise management, Ethernet, or even WPS (for WiFi) support, which all seem like big compromises when the business use includes installing or troubleshooting Internet services.

Ex2: Have noticed my local pizza place takes online orders. But they receive them via a pair of iPad mini's that take up hardly any space. I'm guessing a single vendor set them up as part of a solution likely including the web hosting and perhaps even the point of sale machines. This type of setup seems rather popular locally, and again replaces what would have just been a Windows/Intel PC just a few years ago.

Huh? Where did you pull that from? I just recently bought the new Dell venue 8 pro (USBC / 1080p version) with Windows 10 Pro on it.
​You're probably confusing Venue 8 with Venue 8 Pro.

Thank you for making look a little harder. I checked Dell's site quickly while writing my post, and found that the whole Venue line is omitted from the "For Home" drill-down for tablets, and searching "Venue" only produced results for Win8 and Win8.1 variants of the V8Pro. Now I've found the current models in the For-Business drilldown though.
If you see this, could you recommend any review of the latest version that helped your decision to get yours?

Keep your expectations low, people. Keep your expectations low. Unless you're masochists, of course.

Based on this statement, anything goes really. At the moment they don't have a solid roadmap to reveal what's their strategy on the mobile space but it just tells that they don't completely abandoned it. So the situation is pretty much unchanged. Posted from alternate universe

Intel is starting to manufacture ARM chips. First to others but perhaps later on its own designs. So if any mobile soc in the pipeline it won't be x86.

Intel had an ARM chip that they made called XScale, but 10 years ago they sold it to Marvell. I thought it was a mistake at the time, even more so now. It would be interesting if they got back in now.

That reminds me of it which I forgot. Was it also used on PDAs back then?

The first PDA the Psion Organiser was based on an 8-bit Hitachi 6301-family processor, running at 0.9 MHz, with 4kB of ROM and 2kB of static RAM,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psion_Organiser ​It looks like it was Custom Designed - Would assume a lot of the early ones were also cusom CPUs  

I did a quick check about it and yes, Xscale are used on PDA and smartphones back then. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/XScale

I think you have the masochism thing covered since you use android.

Or we do for being Windows users/fanboys/junkies! =P

/ beta testers

I think the beta tester part was implied, especially with the masochism reference.

Said the king of sadomasochists, spending his time on things he doesn't care about.

Hey, look! Another useless comment from you. But do keep trying buddy.

Always happy to expose your mental problems. "Hey look at me I'm a broken record and I use my time to comment on things I don't like!!" You are welcome.

You know, my friend had an Asus Zenfone 2 that ran on an Intel atom. The phone was actually great. I don't really understand why OEMs don't choose Intel more often. Posted via the Windows Central App for Android

Interesting though, maybe because the licensing is more costly than most ARM Docs, especially that how prevalent the MediaTek SoC is on low-end to higher-mid-range devic es.
There is also not much incentive to use Intel SoC if it's indeed bit more expensive. Not to mention the necessary expertise to optimize the hardware and software for that architecture.
Maybe Intel didn't convinced enough OEM and ODM on why use Intel than most ARM SoC.
There is also a question that the battery life isn't as equal as to those with ARM. In my experience with Zenfone, it doesn't last as I could expect it to be, but not worst. It's just there isn't much benefit about the compromise.
Posted from alternate universe

It was the opposite with the price. Asus used Intel SOCs because Intel provided them at cheap prices since no one was using their processors in phones. The battery life was also not good on the Zenfones which used Intel SOCs. And, the Android version had to come from Intel first since they had to modify Android to run it on x86, which meant the Zenfone 2 is still stuck on Lollipop. Asus must be regretting using them now lol.

There is already a variant of Android x86 for x86 SoC, Remix OS for example is based on that you can now install on PC. Though at least those Intel-based smartphones have respectable performance than can easily compete flagship ARM SoCs last time I checked them (that was 2 years ago though). The problem is really just the battery efficiency, which is a major important factor to a mobile device such as smartphone. Though Intel-based W10M devices is only seems attractive if we can able to run Centennial apps natively on Continuum. Thing is, there seems to be no sign that Continuum supports it at the moment and we don't have the definitive hardware yet to run on except for current Atom SoCs. While waiting that, MS must evolve Continuum drastically to have desktop-like experience that mimics the PC. Heck even Android is capable of that with OEM modifications and other Android flavors such as Remix OS. This leaves little to no excuse for MS not implementing that fast enough for the sake of this W10M platform.

As I understand it from talking to some of my friends, it comes down to cost. ARM is just cheaper. And power consumption to some degree.

@witness,@axcross, and the other guy who I can't remember his name: thanks for your replies and sorry I didn't read them as I didn't realize that the email came in. But regardless, I'm always grateful for you taking the time out to share information with me. Greetings from Jamaica. Posted via the Windows Central App for Android

Surface Phone better be a killer device.Can't wait for a long period of time for another Lumia hardware with a "surface" logo on it.

Derrr... Surface Phone... Derrr Let it go folks.

I hope one of their first processors would be associated with Microsoft..... :-)

doesn't the new iPhone have an Intel processor?

No, it is Apple's take on ARM names the A10.

@nohone, it uses A10 of course. Buy one of the A10 suppliers is intel.

Actually, TSMC makes the A10. Intel never made any of the Apple ARM chips. Previous generations were made by Samsung and TSMC. For the A9, TSMC used a 16nm process, while Samsung used 14nm, but the TSMC performed a bit better and ran cooler, which is the opposite of what is expected. The A10 processor uses 16nm, with quad cores (remember when the Apple fans laughed about other phones using 4, 6 or 8 cores?). Two cores are high performing, while the other two are lower performance, and they supposedly turn off the faster cores when not needed to conserve power. 

If so, Intel is just manufacturing them for Apple like TSMC/Samsung. A10 is still based on ARM v8.

Yes, intel is chip manufacturer. There is a report that their A10 chip doesn't support Verizon.

What everyone else meant to say, is that it uses an Intel sourced modem.

Some of the phones use it. Intel modem does not support CDMA.

Wow. WC finally found out that Broxton was cancelled.

They have talked about it quite often. If you would spend less time trolling and more time actually reading the articles you may have read about it.

"talk less and do more" microsoft said that not so long ago I hope they come back, need a future replacement for atom tablets

Xeon Mobile

Sweet... At last some hope for the Surface Phone successor 2 or 3.

"Renduchintala's statements are still very vague". You can say that again. Statement being vague is an understatement.

What the??? It's raining BS now!!

Intel should just stay out, they either suck at SOC or they are intentially limiting the Atom line to protect profit margins. Until they show a willingness to sacrifice their higher margin m3, m5, m7 & core i3 cpus ($240-280 per 1000 tray) due to an equally performing Atom ($35 per 1000 tray) entering the market, they will never be able to deliver a mobile chip that can stand toe to toe with the top arm SOCs from apple/nvidia/qcomm.  

It only took Intel five months to wake up! Because they now realize the potential mobile device chip growth and the dying desktop chip downfall....

Intel are probably so far ahead in thier thinking we are the clueless ones.  The road map is far far into the future, they most likely know thier competitors roadmaps as well.  Im curious as to what materials they have chosen for thier 7nm chips, wont be silicon.

No, Intel too makes mistakes like any other corporations... stopping the Mobile chip production was a mistake and now its realized...

The world is screaming out for ax86 mobile processor

A new wave of innovation is in order. Until intel can regulate the power consumed by a x86 processor to mobile requirements, it doesn't make sense to put it in a mobile phone. But then, I don't quite understand chipsets :P

It doesn't make sense either way.

The last thing we need is x86 chips on mobile phones. Intel has tried it, but they are not a fit for it. I don't know why some people think it would be a game changer, smartphones users don't care about processor architecture, they care that they have a device with a battery that lasts and apps galore. For the first one, ARM is the way, for the latter on Windows 10, UWP is our best chance.

I'm looking forward to full x86 Windows on phones... I definitely "need" and want it.  Without x86 Windows phones, there won't be x86 driver support for Continuum, thus there won't be any ability to use your phone as a fully usable dockable PC (that will eventually get fast enough to replace main systems or even initially be good enough to replace main desktop systems for light business uses); there wouldn't be any ability to manage x86 phones with the exact same domain logins and management\remote access tools used for business systems that run Windows (hopefully with eventual cloud based biometric logins that allows admins\family members\users to login to their own desktop profile on any system or phone using biometric that authenticates via the cloud); and full x86 Windows is necessary for properly doing RDP into the phone, so that you can pull up your full mobile desktop from practically any desktop computer in the world via RDP, with only a network connection and without a wire or Miracast. Also, full x86 Windows phones would be a poweruser's dream, since then you can custom configure it with scripts and services that make Tasker on Android appear extremely limited in comparison.  Plus then all the x86 PC only apps in the Windows Store would then work on phones; backing up the phone would be far easier and much better using standard Windows backup imaging programs; and the ability to have a large 6-7" phone that can be switched to desktop mode with the full use of the Windows taskbar and tray apps would be fantastic for those that don't mind a large 7" phone... the 7" touchscreen I have appears small enough to belt clip while the GUI elements are around the same size as on my 10 Mobile 640, except the 7" device has far more screen real estate with enough space to run the taskbar well, including apps such as Networx for bandwidth monitoring on the taskbar, etc.  With a Surface style kickstand back that snaps on as the back cover like the 640's cover, it would be great for laying flat at an angle optimal for pointer finger typing and setting on tables\desks as a sort of mini portable desktop touchscreen system, plus even full Office apps and browsers with full extension support are very usable just using touch on a 7" full Windows device, even more so with a stylus, though not necessary (I suppose unless you have really large fingers, though 7" devices such as that may not be too common due to the awkwardness... I wouldn't mind, and maybe some women wouldn't mind to carry in their purses, though I think how large it is would be a turn off to many people, because of how odd it would look up to your head... though that's been a bit of an issue with 6" devices too, and people still use those). I'd really like to see the new "Windows Anywhere" feature support on-demand syncing any Store apps, plus updated OneDrive placeholders that allow syncing ALL desktop\profile documents, so that all apps, settings, and files are available by logging into a MS cloud account from any full Windows 10 computer or phone.  I've read MS may be changing the way placeholders work that I think could allow that... if you look at how placeholders worked before, they could not be seen or launched from the command line, and that sort of limitation was said to only be addressable with file system level changes, that I hope MS is adding, to get placeholders to essentially work identically to local files by automatically downloading and working as if local in all use cases. As for Intel trying x86 mobile chips before, those were larger nm chips with PowerVR\Mali graphics that are only suitable for Android... Windows phones need Intel Graphics that has had driver support maturing for years.  The 2014 HP Stream 7" device using a .22nm processor is proof Intel can make small full Windows devices... even that old device with a small battery got 5 hours of video playback in Anandtech's tests years ago, and performance was competitive other than in 3D, that I think would still be "good enough" with a modern x86 SoC.  Replaceable batteries, quick charging, and new battery tech could enable such devices much better too, such as the new MIT battery tech they're claiming doubles battery life and will be available within the next year (though that's been said before by others, so I'll believe it when I see it).

They know we want the UWP monster, X86, wireless VR/AR capable cell phone processor, hopefully for a waterproof, loaded specs, 3 day battery life, dual simm WITH expandable memory (at the same time, unlike the HP X3) surface phone next year. Come on intel and Microsoft, bring a game changer.

You should contact Turing with that request. I'm sure they can work something out for you alongside all the over-the-top stuff they have announced recently :p

Too much delusion....

I can clearly see the Death of a speculated Surface Phone before its birth. No one (Customs & Developers) will wait for a smartphone about which, even Microsoft have many doubts.

How do you know "MS have many doubts"?

Surprised! You don't know? Sooner or later everyone will come to know. Perhaps you are not following Microsoft properly. They are very confused. No one can save Windows Phone. And Surface Phone; Still a speculation.

So you are just speculating then, I thought you knew something.

so you're speculating the death of a speculated phone and thus think Microsoft is speculatively confused and that speculatively no one can save Windows Phone/Surface phone. 

IMHO, MS wouldn't need to even consider x86 for mobile if they'd haul ass on tech they're already good at. I had thought that the app virtualization HP is selling the x3 for was already supported natively by Win 10 (or even WP8?) as RemoteApp, but seemed to be conceptually inaccessible to potential users, and isolated to Enterprise customers. If they had made that consumer-ready, it could be huge. And now the talk of offloading compute jobs from HoloLens to a nearby PC makes me wonder if they could just do that fo W10m as well. Maybe store x86 code on the phone and execute in-cloud or via WiFi on some x86 hardware like they are testing for HoloLens?

I understand Intel will license ARM designs.

I said it before, ill say it again. Only MS are in any position for the future of mobile. The future is NOT ARM. And Apple and Goolge are not remotely ready for X86 phones. Because they have gone down the split OS route. MS through all the trial and error of the last 6 years have got near a perfect OS for touch and mouse. That is a full OS. Not some poor mobile OS with limited apps.

There has been x86 Android devices for a while now. Who do you think were using those SOCs that Intel canceled? Posted via the Windows Central App for Android

And I for one am enjoying using it. Has been my pleasure watching the os mature to AU and look forward to keeping up with Redstone 2.

Intel once upon a time held a 90% market share of highly integrated feature phones and PDAs.  The product back than was called XScale and featured an ARM-processor.
  So, who knows what Intel is all about when it comes to mobile platforms.
I would not rule out anything. But the comment given does not mean much for the present day.
It just keeps open the door for a new, upcoming opportunity. That's it. However, we could see Intel making an ARM-SoC for Apple
in the coming years. That would mean a performance-leap for iPhones/iPads. But, as the Intel excec noted, they'll talk about it once they have something.
Could be spring 2017, could be spring 2020. Who knows.    

Hmm there were Intel Mobile smartphone CPU's that could run the full Windows10 OS OR Windows10 mobile but Intel killed them. in fact 4 smart phones sold in the market place  used Intel CPU's . When intel killed them the Surface team had to see if AMD has something to offer to replace them. it appears from some rumors that the "Surface" smart phones will use ARMS CPU's which cannot run Desktop PC programs which is BLOW to Windows smart phones fans who want to occashonally run X86.win32 Desktop programs in the Windows10  mobile's continuum mode. It appears that the new "Surface smart phones will operate like the HP Elite X3 and run Desktop PC programs through special Software. Microsoft's will push Businesses and Developers to make MS 'Universal apps which can run on a Computer or device that runs full Windows 10 or the Windows 10 Mobile Operating system. This action will get Windows 10 smart phones plenty of NEW APPS.  

Those 22nm Intel smart phones chips used PowerVR\Mali graphics that I don't think could have been used for x86 Windows anyway.  Windows needs processors that use Intel Graphics that have had drivers maturing a long time.  Maybe they'll surprise us, though I'd guess we wouldn't see a Surface Phone until 2018 using 10nm, even though recent Surface Phone rumors mention 14nm Kaby Lake (that I think must be what the next Surface tablets will use, so possibly that is how that idea got mixed with Surface Phone rumors?).  

I think it was a mistake for Intel to stop  making smart phone CPU's that means ARMS CPU's will forever domnate smart phones.Intel does still make some ATOM CPU'S than can be used in  7 , 8 inch or larger tablets/Hybrid 2 in one's that run full Windows 10 windows 10 mobile can run on these tablets but I think only a couple of OEM's demonsrated this at CES 2015 an 2016 both were on 7 inch tablets

Isn't the Atom line essentially dead? Intel will still produce the current Atom X3/5/7, but there won't be any new generation of Atom processors for tablets and 2-in-1?

It only took 5 months for Intel to wake up and realize the potential market in the growing trend of mobile device chip and the downfall of the desktop PC chip which is hurting them!.....

Pretty sure he is talking about the ARM chips they are working on.

From reading the comments looks like I'm a minority, nobody wants Intel x64 on a phone, which makes me wonder if Continuum and Surface Phone will be another product without developer support like Windows RT was.  On other news, I just installed Cortana and Bing apps on my Sony Xperia M4 Aqua, to be honest I don't miss Windows Phone, all the reasons which I liked on Windows Phone are now on Android.