Microsoft could end up like Apple with total control of Windows Phone software and hardware

Microsoft could end up like Apple with total control of Windows Phone software and hardware
Considering that Nokia represents a huge chunk of the Windows Phone market, Microsoft's purchase of Nokia means that it will have to straddle two worlds. One world is made up of the models that Nokia once produced, and the other world is the one in which it supports other OEMs like HTC, Samsung and Huawei. Will other manufacturers even want to go through the trouble of competing against Microsoft with the Windows Phone platform?

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.

source: WMPoweruser

FEATURED VIDEO

41 Comments

1. ocilfa

Posts: 334; Member since: Aug 03, 2012

Wonderful! We all know how successful Microsoft is with hardware.

3. Heritor

Posts: 47; Member since: Nov 05, 2012

Uh... you know they have been successful with hardware called the Xbox and Xbox 360 right?

4. DukeX

Posts: 327; Member since: Aug 28, 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 unregistered

Well you must of had issues, because I only went through 1 of them.

10. CX3NT3_713

Posts: 2349; Member since: Apr 18, 2011

I went threw one,, red ring of death? Haha

27. natesvlogs

Posts: 40; Member since: May 15, 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: 872; Member since: Apr 20, 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: 2340; Member since: Feb 14, 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: http://www.simpsonstreetfreepress.org/images/Microsoft%20Kin.jpg We all know how that turned out. But on the bright side, they do make nice controllers.

13. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 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: 459; Member since: Sep 14, 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: Oct 24, 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: 2340; Member since: Feb 14, 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: 328; Member since: Aug 15, 2012

actually the main reason was largely the Blu-ray drive :)

29. Dr.Phil

Posts: 2340; Member since: Feb 14, 2011

http://www.joystiq.com/2006/05/27/a-look-at-how-the-ps3-got-to-be-600/ "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: Oct 24, 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: 2340; Member since: Feb 14, 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: 2340; Member since: Feb 14, 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: Oct 24, 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: 174; Member since: Nov 21, 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: 778; Member since: Oct 17, 2012

i've always been curious about a Surface phone or w/e they decided to call it

6. papss unregistered

Again I could care less IF they make amazing phones with an incredibly smooth modern OS. the better apple if you dare to imagine ;)

33. WHoyton1

Posts: 1635; Member since: Feb 21, 2013

you are such a M$ fanboy!!!

7. timezone

Posts: 87; Member since: Jun 16, 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: 249; Member since: Aug 08, 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: 334; Member since: Jun 04, 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: 140; Member since: Jun 16, 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: Sep 11, 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: 334; Member since: Jun 04, 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: 90; Member since: Dec 23, 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: Jun 10, 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.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.