To be fair to them, it was only announced in the US yesterday and they won't be selling any devices with it on for six months, so why the heck should they know anything about it? Maybe they have better things to do with their non-work time than read articles about phones...

Jon

I'm not buying that... surely there should be some sort of company newsletter/email notification service where they'd get a message along the lines of "Windows Mobile 7 is coming out, and here's what you need to know..."

Windows Phone 7 looks zippier because it is running on faster hardware... Put it on your XDA and it would crawl worse than 6.1 - probably why MS never offer upgrades to Windows Mobile.

What windows without backward compatibility

You are assuming that they have competant managers who are on the ball. In my experiance I get emails about products from managers asking me have I heard about this product and can I source some to get tested, usually 2-3 weeks after I have sent them an email to say "hey look at this new product.. but dont worry Im getting it and will report to you about it"

The apps work. My HUKD App works on 6.5 but was developed for 6.1

7 though.... I heard you have to use the app store, which I strongly disagree with (mainly due to the fact I have to pay them to release a free application and I am forced to update it if there are bugs, whether it is stupidly old or not).

The beauty of Android and WM over the iPhone is to be able to download and install apps that are legit from smaller 3rd party developers.

Erm, I though that there were thousands of very small third party developers using Apples store.

And millions who either couldn't afford the Apple tax or got rejected by the Apple Nazis.

Personally I think it looks awesome, I had a look at the Windows Phone 7 page, and tbh, I wish they'd shown the actual 'phone' bits, like making phonecalls, texts etc.

Other than that I really do like the look of it, but like others have said, WTF at the text being half cut off?! I can see why they've done it, but my God, it's rather craply implemented. But the idea was amazing as a concept....

Hope my HD2 gets a free upgrade

Exactly

I left the part of being forced to use the marketplace as I thought that would be clear from the previous paragraph

Millions? Are you sure their are millions?


Again I thought that this was one of the cheapest possible ways to get an application published. You live and learn.

A quote from Phil Schiller makes them look a little less like nazis to my mind.



Personally I would not want an "open" store. It would be a bit like using a PC without the benefit of anti virus software.

Well if you look at the number of developers on the XDA developers forum as a small percentage of potential developers. Then take into account the relatively high cost of development compared to Android (and partly windows mobile only on the basis of having a Windows PC where as Android can also be developed on Linux and presumably a Mac), the cost to submit to the store (where as I can use OpnMarket on my phone (from freewarepocketpc.net) where I have signed up as a developer and I'm in the middle of submitting my app where when it reaches the market will be freely available for anyone using the service.

You wouldn't want an open store but you accept having a closed store where apps have been released that steal personal information? Peer review is far more powerful than a single closed review.

50 or so apps had to be pulled by Google recently because they took bank details. There was no way to kill the apps from the phones for those that had already downloaded them. I have not seen a list of the applications did Google Email people who had bought them to tell them that there was a problem? What if the Apps had not come from the Google store how would that have been dealt with? Is there a list of the apps that need to be avoided in future? If my Dad had downloaded a nasty app. to his open phone how would peer review help him?

AFAIK there was a single case of an app. in the Apple store logging phone numbers, it was high profile and turned out to be a mistake in the code as submitted by the developer and no numbers found their way to bad people's hands. Apple had the ability to "kill" the app from every iPhone in the world but has not to date needed to do so for this or any other app.

I am all for choice. I am glad that open stores exist, I just would not use one myself.

CC, the Google example is another example of a closed review Very similar to how Apple do it...

The stores I am talking about are ones that are based on peer reviews.

If the app didn't come from a closed store it would be dealt with exactly the same as a closed store, open stores also have the power to kill apps if they are designed as such, though the damage may have already been done.

Google have had to take down some apps from their store, which were malware, because the store is open and anybody can submit anything...

Apple's App Store is far from perfect and they have also been caught out a couple of times, with software sending more data home than it should. But generally they are very good at filtering out the bad eggs.

That said, the Apple App Store is far from perfect and seem to reject applications for other reasons as well. Big reasons seem to be: Apple think it could encroach on their business; the description contains the words "charityware" or "all proceeds from the sale of this app will go to <insert organisation name here>"; their telecoms partners think the app will steal revenue (E.g. Google Phone); the description of the App contains the word "Android"...