Outlook tops Gmail in the Apple App Store

Nothing to do with fanboy. Simply giving his perspective. No reason to get butthurt.

hurt alert. Right now the main advantage windows will have is. 1.5billion active devices. New pcs, especially on enterprise if they choose windows 10, that when you develop an app, you have a 1.5billion customer base. This is huge, and will truly be the tale if people want the same apps on their pc as on their phone. I for one love it. I have 3 tablets right now itching for windows 10, itching for my phone apps to seemlessly be available on them for the kids.

Don't forget that Google is not sitting on its laurels. Also Google has well over 2 billion customers already. Also Android has more tablet and smart phone users then anyone.

Google technically doesnt, not every android is google android, and a large portion of their China sales are AOSP free of google. While the OS is doing well...it becomes a battle to keep it in googles favor, which i think they will do just fine, and wont count them out. As long as no antitrust hits them, which i dont think will ever happen, they are set for awhile until something comes along and makes googles version of the mobile sphere go away. The only potential of that happening, is MS ditching arm all together, and intel providing baytrail or cherrytrail x86 socs for phones. Letting MS provide a much richer experience with a full windows core with a ui designed for small phones. They also need to adress the complaints of OEM's, and allow custom UI's, but have it follow a phylosophy. I know phones UI is what sets things apart, and they should if a custom UI is allowed, force OEM's to make a marketing plow of powered by windows in everything they do.

So in an earlier article you stated it was like 40% of all Androids are not running Google's version. Its much lower then that, but we will say even 50% of all Android devices are not running Googles version, just to make you happy. Now that means over a billion people which for the most part are not using Microsoft's apps or services, and for the vast majority of those people are living just fine without Microsoft and its apps and services. "The only potential of that happening, is MS ditching arm all together, and intel providing baytrail or cherrytrail x86 socs for phones. Letting MS provide a much richer experience with a full windows core with a ui designed for small phones." I am beginning to think either you don't look at what you type in, or you are having a brain fart. So I am finding it hard to believe in your mind if MS ditches ARM all together and only supports x86 socs for phones. This will let MS provide a much richer experience with full windows for phones. But then in your next paragraph you go on to say they need to address the complaints of OEMs. Well currently right now OEMs that have made any WP devices for MS, have to follow Microsoft's strict guidelines which includes the hardware and your only few specific Qualcomm socs they can use, which displays are supported, along with other hardware restrictions. This is in place today with WP. So with Microsoft restricting it to only x86 specific CPUs only. How is that going to help with sales of WP or Windows 10 phone? Hows that currently working out for Microsoft's WP after almost 5 years? No need to answer that one, because we both know. So with Microsoft restricting it to x86 only for phones. How do you think the vendors and OEMs will take that? It makes no sense. Microsoft has to include support for more Arm socs, or MS takes the risk of becoming a niche platform, which it was heading down that path until it introduced Windows 10 and universal apps. BTW Android has been an agnostic platform from day one, and the vast majority of Androids 1.5 million apps will work on any hardware (x86, ARM, MIPS), tablets, phones, smart watches, laptops, TVs, game boxes, cars, and more. This is where Microsoft still has to play catch up to Android and Google's play store apps. Remember Microsoft developers have to get on board, write and support universal apps.

I know its confusing for either one minded people or to see that people have open minds and open to many aspects. MS does have a problem. Yes a billion devices, if you honestly think those billion people do not have some form of MS ecosystem in their home or access to, here is a bridge to buy. The difference becomes, we have moved away from 3-4 pcs in the home and back to the 1-2 pcs, with 6 cell phones. Fact still remains there is 1.5billion devices running windows. And while that may dwindle, in the end for the near future, Companies and productivity users will have a mac or pc to use. We could call it agnostic, but my 4.1 app will not run on 2.1 android, it breaks without modifying the code. You might call it, minor modification, but in the end you have to modify it. Once more the only way to show dominance is to literally outdo the hardware way. Windows core already supports intel, so 'limited' number of socs goes from the 801 down to the 200 QUALCOMM, if there is more needed then you really have a difficult OEM. My statement still stands, if you want to make android irrelevant you have to make their foundation irrelevant. Apps exist within the android ecosystem because they were simply no other way to do it on a phone. You take that mindset away, and give a full pc chip that can run nearly all pc apps, then there is no need to create an 'app' in the traditional sense anymore. There is no need for a company to create a webportal, an app, and develop for 5 different software. Currently pc's have the luxury of what android has the luxury, device hardware adaptation. If you throw that same adaptation into a phone, it is now a flood gate. Mainly cause, x86 can run arm without any hiccups in an emulator state without to big of overhead. Currently the windows 10 code is arm compliant, so you wouldn't ditch it, but for the Lumia line, you set a precedent with intel and show OEM's what they can do with a intel chip. My 8in tablet blows away 'phones' and it cost me 150 brand new. All it needs is LTE and whats the point of a phone? In fact, with skype only costing 2.99 and me able to get 10-15 dollar data plans for tablets with my carrier whats the point of me having a 80 dollar bill? Google has partnered with sprint as an MVNO. Have MS partner as an MVNO with skype as the backbone of the 'phone'.

You really are stuck on Windows and truly don't know anything about any other platform or OEM's for that matter. So you think showing a precedent with Intel chips and showing OEM's what intel can do is going to help Windows. Okay so lets say it helps Windows. Now what do you think is going to happen with the OEM's? Are they just going to drop ARM, MIPS, or others all together? Now I will ask you this, why does Microsoft even want to bother with universal apps then, if going with x86 will solve and offer so much more? Why because Microsoft has realized that from day one Android didn't care what hardware you were running on (x86, ARM, MIPS). Its just didn't matter from day one. However Microsoft and a lot of others were complaining that Android was slow because it used a Virtual Machine to execute its applications. However in the long run this made Android future proof. Not to mention CPUs, GPUs and ram speeds on mobile devices are starting to rival a lot of desktops and laptops. Now fast forward today and now both Microsoft with its Universal apps and Apple with its Apple Swift are offering something like Android. Apple has to because its CPUs use to be the fastest ARM processors, but now there are a number of ARM OEMs that are surpassing Apples AX chips. Also Apple has to rely on its competition in order to make some its components. But that's only one reason. The other reason for Swift is because Apple wants to tie in its Desktop/Laptop OS X with its mobile iOS applications (iPad, iPod, iPhone, Apple TV and Apple Watch). This is the future for every platform. Why do you think Microsoft is doing the same with its Universal apps for Desktop/Laptop, Tablets, Phones, XBox and other devices. So dropping ARM or focusing only on Intel is great for legacy applications, but it will alienate the other OEMs (ARM, MIPS, PowerPC and others). Why do you think Android is the chosen platform for Ara? Its because Android uses a Linux kernel, which currently supports every CPU known to man, and Android sits on top and doesn't care what hardware its running on. I kind of laughed at your x86 can run ARM without any hiccups in an emulator state without to big of an overhead. Please do you even know anything about Operating Systems? First of all if you have even a Windows 10 for phone device running just Microsoft's OS only requires systems resources like CPU, GPU, Ram, and storage. Now if you want to run another OS even in emulation mode will require even more resources. Like more CPU, GPU, Ram and storage. Also with two running OS's running simultaneously with multi-tasking will also take a big hit on battery life and TDP. If you even think existing WP devices with only 512mb of Ram are going to run Android as well as Windows 10 for phones. Think again buddy. Its not going to happen. I will bet you a million dollars on that one. BTW the vast majority of WP devices in the world are only 512mb WP devices.

I forgot to add that currently low end ARM processors are still better then Intel's lowest Atom processors for TDP and battery life. Also half decent ARM chips also have built in 3G, 4G, LTE wireless support, unlike Intel Atom chips that require outside third party chips to offer that support, which consumes more power. So ARM processors are still better then any Intel processor on phones.

Sorry man i am not a fanboy of any platform - Note 3 neo and Note 8 are my main devices...i use (have to use) windows on regular way and my Note 8 is constantly on RDC to my winserver. I must agree i had also ThinkPad tablet 2 with win8+digitizer but after 2 days it was resaled. I just dont like where is google heading with material and stuff.... I simply see that if MS will take their mobile platform RIGHT, then google have to fear....MS have servers, PCs with w10 solid tablets and phones...google has chrome os, web browser, tablets that are just bigger phones....i will probably switch with Win10 release.

Sorry for the rubbish word i used...You are right some prefer google but i receive files only made on MS excel and 99% of them drive and sheets are not able to open them properly. Just yesterday i was sitting at the pc and had time to compare both side ti side...Drive vs OneDrive...Sheets vs Excel Online...Gmail vs Outlook.com in browser...actually i like those changes that MS recently made and i move my gmail onto outlook.com.

I use Office more than I use GoogleDocs, mainly because of being able to open all files, mine and customers. And I do like Office 2013. When it comes to webinterface, I always prefered outlook.com over gmail. So much simpler and colorfull. And this new app is a gem as well, but use it only for my outlook email adress. I use 3 different mails apps, including outlook, because of my homescreen, tasker setup. I am curious about Cortana on the desktop.