SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Bill Gates has said that he thinks everyone would be using Windows Mobile right now and not Android if it weren't for his distractions and the antitrust investigation that his company got caught into.
"There's no doubt that the antitrust lawsuit was bad for Microsoft, and we would have been more focused on creating the phone operating system and so instead of using Android today you would be using Windows Mobile," Gates claimed during his speech at The New York Times' DealBook Conference.
[...] Microsoft cofounder also revealed that the company was almost launching Windows Mobile on a Motorola handset but missed out on it by a few months, giving Android an unbeatable advantage. While there were a lot of factors, Gates says it's this 3-months delay that led to Android's supremacy and the downfall of any mobile efforts by Microsoft.
"We were just three months too late on a release Motorola would have used on a phone, so yes it's a winner takes all game."
Related:
Nadella: Microsoft Isn't Killing Windows Phone and Will Go It Alone
Steve Balmer: Use Android to Save Windows Phone
Microsoft Breaks its Windows 10 Mobile Upgrade Promise
Microsoft Axes 2,850 More Windows Phone, Sales Staff
Windows Phone Dies, Aged 6
It's Been 5 Years Already, Let's Gawp at Microsoft and Nokia's Bloodbath
Microsoft is Embracing Android as the Mobile Version of Windows
(Score: 3, Touché) by SomeGuy on Saturday November 09 2019, @10:36AM (2 children)
Sure, sure. And if it hadn't been for Microsoft, everyone would be using IBM ThinkPhones running OS/2 Mobile.
Sorry, the main reason people use "smart" phones is so they don't have to have the perceived complexity and lock-in of a desktop computer. Any device with the Microsoft logo does not give that perception (despite the reality of how complex and locked in smart phones of any OS really are.)
(Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Saturday November 09 2019, @03:03PM (1 child)
Huh? I thought the reason people used "smart phones" is because they are so portable. iPhone users, for instance, are pretty locked in. And, Android users aren't much less so. There are really only two choices, choice 1 locks you into one walled garden, choice 2 locks you into another garden with lower walls. My "desktop" is far less locked than either Apple or Android. But, it's sure not very portable!!
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Saturday November 09 2019, @07:31PM
I think SomeGuy is in error with his comment about lock-in; you're right, both iOS and Android users are locked-in to some degree, and don't seem to mind. I think he's right, however, about the complexity bit. Phones are generally simple to operate. They don't need regular virus updates and reboots. They don't have McAfee on them, slowing them down.
I think MS's reputation from their desktop OS was a big factor in why no one wanted their phones. How many office drones have PTSD after having to use Windows all day at work, especially after their IT department has loaded it down with all kinds of corporate crapware and McAfee? You wouldn't believe how long it takes me just to switch to my Outlook window and read my email; it's much faster for me to look at my GMail account on my phone! And that's in 2019; back in the early/mid 2000s, using Windows at work was a pretty lousy experience, with constant virus alerts (I regularly came to work to see posters on the door saying "warning! don't open this email!" because a new Outlook virus was going around), updates, reboots, etc. What kind of moron would want a phone that worked this poorly?