x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options

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

0. phoneArena posted on 19 Sep 2013, 17:49

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...

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 17:52 10

1. ocilfa (Posts: 334; Member since: 03 Aug 2012)

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

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 18:02 16

3. Heritor (Posts: 47; Member since: 05 Nov 2012)

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

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 18:12 4

4. DukeX (Posts: 327; 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.

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 18:14 2

5. HASHTAG (unregistered)

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

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 18:44

10. CX3NT3_713 (Posts: 2286; Member since: 18 Apr 2011)

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

posted on 20 Sep 2013, 00:10

27. natesvlogs (Posts: 40; 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.

posted on 20 Sep 2013, 07:37

37. DontHateOnS60 (Posts: 872; 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...

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 18:50

12. Dr.Phil (Posts: 1639; 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.

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 18:59

13. joey_sfb (Posts: 6601; 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.

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 21:03

16. woodshop20 (Posts: 459; 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.

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 21:52

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

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 23:16 1

25. Dr.Phil (Posts: 1639; 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.

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 23:32

26. nlbates66 (Posts: 328; Member since: 15 Aug 2012)

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

posted on 20 Sep 2013, 00:56

29. Dr.Phil (Posts: 1639; 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.

posted on 20 Sep 2013, 00:18

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

posted on 20 Sep 2013, 00:58

30. Dr.Phil (Posts: 1639; 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?

posted on 20 Sep 2013, 01:01

32. Dr.Phil (Posts: 1639; 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.

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 21:59

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

posted on 20 Sep 2013, 05:04

36. picka_vi_materina (Posts: 174; 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.

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 17:52 3

2. kozza3 (Posts: 715; Member since: 17 Oct 2012)

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

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 18:15 2

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 ;)

posted on 20 Sep 2013, 01:23 1

33. WHoyton1 (Posts: 1635; Member since: 21 Feb 2013)

you are such a M$ fanboy!!!

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 18:19 1

7. timezone (Posts: 87; 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.

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 20:28 1

15. Pdubb (Posts: 248; 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.

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 21:49

18. jdoee100 (Posts: 334; 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.

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 22:29

22. luxzy801 (Posts: 140; 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!!!!!!!!!!!!

posted on 20 Sep 2013, 03:40

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...

posted on 20 Sep 2013, 18:56

40. jdoee100 (Posts: 334; 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.

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 18:27 3

8. ilani (Posts: 90; Member since: 23 Dec 2011)

if you EVER make the mistake of removing the Nokia name from your phones, you guys are DONE!

posted on 19 Sep 2013, 18:40 4

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.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories