Microsoft could end up like Apple with total control of Windows Phone software and hardware
At a financial conference on Thursday, Microsoft said that it could still support Windows Phone models produced by other manufacturers. There are some who believe that companies like Samsung, HTC, Huawei and TCL Alcatel will still release Windows Phone models still in the pipeline, but will close the spigot after that.
While Microsoft might not admit to it, being the sole manufacturer of Windows Phone models might work out in its favor and could lead to quicker and more feature-rich OS updates. After all, keeping total production of the hardware and software in house is something that has worked out just fine for Apple.
1. ocilfa (Posts: 204; Member since: 03 Aug 2012)
Wonderful! We all know how successful Microsoft is with hardware.
3. Heritor (Posts: 30; Member since: 05 Nov 2012)
Uh... you know they have been successful with hardware called the Xbox and Xbox 360 right?
4. DukeX (Posts: 323; Member since: 28 Aug 2013)
Thats a gaming system. This is cell tech. Gaming systems success come from developers. But remember the 360 had issues. I went through 3 of them.
5. HASHTAG (Posts: 384; Member since: 26 Mar 2013)
Well you must of had issues, because I only went through 1 of them.
10. CX3NT3_713 (Posts: 1054; Member since: 18 Apr 2011)
I went threw one,, red ring of death? Haha
27. natesvlogs (Posts: 39; Member since: 15 May 2012)
my first Xbox spent more time with Microsoft getting repaired than at my house. at least I got a free month of XBL when I got it back. 6 month total.
37. DontHateOnS60 (Posts: 722; Member since: 20 Apr 2009)
And that's why they bought Nokia's handset division... so they can now have all that cell phone making and distribution know-how...
12. Dr.Phil (Posts: 789; Member since: 14 Feb 2011)
They've been successful with sales of the 360, but analyzing the actual piece of hardware is another story.
In my opinion, the 360 was never up to the same standard as the PS3 was. The PS3 seemed to run cooler while also being more powerful. It's hard to say how the next generation of consoles will be at this moment, but that's a different story.
Also, just remember that Microsoft was the one behind those Kin smartphones we had a few years ago:
We all know how that turned out. But on the bright side, they do make nice controllers.
13. joey_sfb (Posts: 1477; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)
I was happy with my xbox 360 slim till i saw their power brick...WTF is that!!... compare to my PS3 there no noisy external power brick.
You are right PS3 still run cooler with an internal power circuitry.
16. woodshop20 (Posts: 433; Member since: 14 Sep 2013)
Yep, the PS3 had pretty good build quality. The PS2 slim was another matter though....went through three of them and after the fourth one failed, I just gave up on it.
19. Rehankhan (Posts: 323; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)
'The PS3 seemed to run cooler while also being more powerful' uh uh i think you forgot all those sub hd third party games running at 25fps on ps3 all these years until last year third party developer finally made ps3 games run on same performance as xbox 360 so NO ps3 is not powerfull despite all those red ring xbox 360 slim have been great console this gen and i still laugh at all those pro
25. Dr.Phil (Posts: 789; Member since: 14 Feb 2011)
I have to disagree. The cell processor in the PS3 was ahead of it's time. I mean it was one of the main reasons the PS3 was twice the price of the Xbox at launch.
The fps doesn't necessarily equate to raw power. You can run a game at 60 fps but the graphical quality of such a game may be low, which is what was evident with games on the 360.
26. nlbates66 (Posts: 131; Member since: 15 Aug 2012)
actually the main reason was largely the Blu-ray drive :)
29. Dr.Phil (Posts: 789; Member since: 14 Feb 2011)
"the final price was escalated by two very advanced (and very expensive) pieces of Sony technology."
In that article it mentions the cell processor technology being one of the two most expensive components that drove the PS3's price up. If you re-read my comment, I did not state "the main reason" but rather "one of the main reasons" which is true. If people were to actually sit and read what a person was writing, we wouldn't be having these little squabbles all the time.
28. Rehankhan (Posts: 323; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)
dude what are you smoking look at any third party game they ALL run better on xbox 360 it took devs a whole generation to learn that cell processor which was nothing special what sony told to consumer and nlbates66 is right it was blu-ruy drive why ps3 cost that much on launch basically sony tried to make a entertainment settop box back in 2006 which microsoft is doing now its all same thing again expect this time microsoft is what sony was in 2006 and sony is what microsoft was in 2005 but yeah i think you dont know what you are talking about and no ps3 is not powerfull i think you haven't played many games
30. Dr.Phil (Posts: 789; Member since: 14 Feb 2011)
Obviously you aren't realizing the fact that the games that don't really look that much better on PS3 were the games DEVELOPED using the Xbox 360 and then ported over. Please tell me what Xbox 360 games rival "Beyond Two Souls" and "The Last of Us" in graphical quality?
32. Dr.Phil (Posts: 789; Member since: 14 Feb 2011)
This is based on the knowledge that it was easier for developers to develop games using Direct X than it was for them to develop using OpenGL which is not as widely used by developers. Microsoft has a bigger advantage in having easier development software which, again, is why more games were developed to favor the Xbox 360 versus the PS3.
20. Rehankhan (Posts: 323; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)
and i still laugh at all those promises that sony made in the start of this gen that ps3 games will run at native 1080p res on 60fps iirc microsoft never made those promises
36. picka_vi_materina (Posts: 146; Member since: 21 Nov 2011)
The initial PS3 design that was supposed to be released by crazy Ken was based on 2 Cell CPUs. A single Cell would do the job of the RSX and excel at it. The RSX was a quick design change asked by developers.
2. kozza3 (Posts: 524; Member since: 17 Oct 2012)
i've always been curious about a Surface phone or w/e they decided to call it
6. papss (Posts: 2171; Member since: 03 Sep 2012)
Again I could care less IF they make amazing phones with an incredibly smooth modern OS. the better apple if you dare to imagine ;)
7. timezone (Posts: 35; Member since: 16 Jun 2013)
I don't get these crazy stories. Yes I suppose there is an element of truth or possibility it can happen. Just that there needs to be more clarification. With Android, Samsung is the only successful company and now with Google owning Motorola Mobility why have we not seen a mass exit? If the other Android manufactures are willing to stay with Samsung and Google as the prime movers then surely these same manufactures won't be spooked by Microsoft. In fact they should do better if they switched to the Windows phone.
15. Pdubb (Posts: 223; Member since: 08 Aug 2011)
Android is free(mostly) while the other ones pay MS for the use if its OS. So you see the dilemma of paying to use the OS of your competitor.
18. jdoee100 (Posts: 260; Member since: 04 Jun 2013)
Samsung is NOT the only successful Android company. All other Android companies made money last quarter, that includes Sony, LG, HTC, Huawei, Oppo, Levono,,,,,etc. This is why Android is successful. It's open and competitive. Apple and Microsoft have no chance, if they keep it closed and no competition within their system. Microsoft needs to keep Samsung, HTC and Huawei in the Windows phone platform to keep itself competitive.
22. luxzy801 (Posts: 106; Member since: 16 Jun 2010)
Really bro, then why is HTC having so many financial issues and continually getting slammed because it is not selling enough units (Even though the HTC one is a great piece of hardware), LG cant get it together and will never sell even half of what HTC is selling, Huawei cant make sh** stick on a wall, and it definately cant compete in other markets outside of china, except maybe for the sub 100 dollar prepaid units. And the great and all powerful Sony couldnt make a good smartphone 7 years ago and I really dont expect much from them now, and niether does anyone else. Everyone is always talking about how great these manufacturers are while typing in the comments section from their Samsung Galaxy series LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!
34. AKumar47 (Posts: 48; Member since: 11 Sep 2013)
todays competitions between diff OSes are all the same unlike ms a well established software developer... patent issues is the main factor... lucky for them they owned the mswin that all the company must buy...
ms is all around with ya pc's, tablets,phablets and phones...vice versa, ms will definitely be there...
40. jdoee100 (Posts: 260; Member since: 04 Jun 2013)
HTC is having financial issues because of their years of blunders, they're not due to Android. Despite their blunders, they have managed to make profits up to now. This speaks volumes of Android platform. Not convinced? Just look it Nokia(sold to MS with significant discount) and BB(losing $1billion 2nd quarter alone).
"LG cant get it together..." Huh?, LG is one of top 5 smartphone makers right now, and they're selling more than HTC(Not sure, but HTC is like 11th smartphone maker in the world now.)
"Huawei....cant compete in other markets outside of china." How about Nokia and Apple? Nokia is only somewhat popular in India(losing market share in US,China,Europe,,) Apple is only popular in US and few other places. Without US, Apple is no different than Nokia and BB.
Sony, LG, Chinese smartphone makers are making profit and doing better than most non-Android makers.
8. ilani (Posts: 38; Member since: 23 Dec 2011)
if you EVER make the mistake of removing the Nokia name from your phones, you guys are DONE!
9. Googler (Posts: 813; Member since: 10 Jun 2013)
The amount of comments about how Android was going to die because Google purchased Motorola was overwhelming. Couple of years later and it's still there, going stronger than ever. I see no reason why Microsoft can't do a similar thing with WP and the Lumia lineup.
23. luxzy801 (Posts: 106; Member since: 16 Jun 2010)
True, but Google didnt change Motorola Droid to Google Droid. If Microsoft changes Nokia to Microsoft, I think its fortunes are pretty obvious. In my opinion, at this point they will only find success if they keep the Nokia moniker on all the phones coming out of Redmond at this point. It will boost everything considering its a "Nokia" instead of Microsoft. Im afraid that if they change it, it will meet the same fate as the Kin series.
38. Googler (Posts: 813; Member since: 10 Jun 2013)
They have a very creative marketing job ahead of them. Biggest thing they have to do before changing anything is get the Lumia series to become a household name, they aren't there yet. Once that happens, I'm not sure what name on the back of the phone makes a difference.
Buying Nokia's smartphones wasn't an easy one step to success process.
11. Kishin (Posts: 199; Member since: 30 May 2013)
Nice this way microsoft could update windows much faster cause of complete controll over windowsphone
14. -box- (Posts: 3470; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
I'm optimistic. They've learned lessons from the Kin, Zune, Xbox, Surface (table), and Surface (tablets) hardware, plus they're strong on software (OS and deployable software like Office) and were pioneers in cloud storage, plus close collaboration on computers, phones, vehicle infotainment systems, etc., and as phones become the hub of everything electronic (cars, phones, home alarm and control systems, computers) in folks' lives, they are and will continue to be poised to be at the forefront and dominate the future electronic frontiers better than any other company out there.
17. Joshing4fun (Posts: 960; Member since: 13 Aug 2010)
I think this is a good thing. Hopefully now they'll put more effort into the phones. I'd love to see a windows phone as powerful as android. Just don't nickel and dime me like Apple.
21. cameogt (Posts: 88; Member since: 18 Oct 2012)
"Microsoft could end up like Apple with total control of Windows Phone software and hardware"
- but i thought, since from the start of WP7, that is what they're aiming for?
31. ilia1986 (unregistered)
Microsoft wants to be like apple?
That's like C3PO wanting to be like Darth Vader. Makes no sense.
35. AKumar47 (Posts: 48; Member since: 11 Sep 2013)
ms wants to be like apple in terms of pc's to phone, apple wants to be like ms in terms of phone to pc's...
both of this companies compliments with our devices in terms of OSes..
39. theruleslawyer (Posts: 108; Member since: 23 Apr 2012)
They already have such strict limits on the platform. I'm not sure total control buys them much.
41. 7thspaceman (Posts: 718; Member since: 14 Feb 2011)
I think Microsoft will continue to have two types of Windows devices on the Market which are
1= Microsoft's "OWN" signature brand that runs their software exactly like Microsoft wants it to run. These devices will be good for People who want an unaltered form of Microsoft's software to run their device 2=Microsoft's OEM Partner version's which will have some of the OEM's software Added and as much customization of the Microsoft's software as Microsoft allows.
the case designs and choice of hardware Microsoft's OEM's have in some case's may be better than Microsoft's. for instance to me the "SONY" TAP 11 with it's thinner lighter design is a better than the Surface Pro case design. It has a digital pen as well and has what appears to be Type covers like the Surface pro has. It's design is what many expected the surface Pro 2 to be like
which is thinner and lighter. I do not think the Sony tap 11 has a tougher case wise but it looks good and a lot of people will buy them. Microsoft wants it's OEM partners devices to sell well also so it continue to make money off them by selling them Microsoft's software.