Given that Android is now outselling iPhone (units per day), I would certainly include Android users in any beta programme.

Edit: From the reports from the people who have been looking at early review units, Windows Phone 7 does seem to be a genuine leap forward and a couple of the commentators have said that it is a better user experience than the iPhone...

That said, the Zune HD was a better user experience, in terms of the core functionality, than the iPod Touch, it just didn't have the apps to compete and it was never sold outside of its home market...

Yes, a genuine leap forward now. But it's released at the end of the year. iOS 4 will be out by then, and both Microsoft's competitors in the field (I'm not counting RIM as they seem to be a different animal in this game) will already be developing next year's OS, which will leap ahead of Microsoft again by several bounds.

Microsoft may have caught up and surpassed the state of the art today, but they'll be left behind again in short order. They need to leap into next year's smart phone OS now, not have this year's late by six months.

That's how I read the pundits and tech columns on this. Bear in mind I have no vested interests either way, as I don't own or plan on owning a smart phone of any kind for some time yet.

I wouldn't necessary read too much into that statistic, it's a little simplistic. All android phones together are outselling the iPhone, which is rather like saying all Ford cars are outselling the VW Golf. If you include iPod touches and iPads in the statistics, 'Android devices' aren't anywhere near outselling 'iOS devices'. Course if you're O2 you don't really care about touches (and less about iPads) but if you're say an app developer you do, so you have to ask what the criteria you're interested in are. Lies, damn lies etc.
The one thing I always try to keep in mind is Apple actually sell more iPod touches than they do iPhones, yet hardly anybody ever includes touches in their analysis. That's partly because Apple don't give out as much sales info as the Telcos do so the detail isn't there to analyse but I think ignoring it would be a mistake.


I've got a Mobile 6.5 phone for work and frankly a rock would be a genuine leap forward. I'm somewhat ambivalent about Win7 - I want it to be good because in my line of work everyone having winmo phones would actually make my life much simpler. However I can't honestly see it being good enough to get anywhere near grabbing a large chunk of the market.


Never understood that TBH. Apple sell pretty as many touches outside the US as they do in it. If they had released the latest one in the EU it wouldn't have had the stigma attached to the initial models did here and it might genuinely have stood a chance. Still, that's MS for you.

I've had iOS4 for over a month now, and the last comparison I read was iOS4 vs. Android 2.2 vs. Win Phone 7...

2 months != 4 months. It's releasing in Europe in October

Whatever, it's maybe a couple of notches better than Android and iOS in October. Where will those two be by summer next year?

That's my point.

So what? It is not like they can't provide updates so what does it matter what Apple will do in the future? That what Google is doing

And there, in a nutshell, is part of Microsoft's problem. They're not worrying enough, risking everything on current users just sticking with them.

While I enjoy this kind of debate, we've reached the point where (a) I don't know enough to continue sensibly, (b) don't have a vested interest in any of it and (c) don't really care one way or the other.

I would say the opposite is true. They are risking everything! This is the first time in their history, that they have thrown out all backwards compatibility (any users of previous generations of Windows Mobile won't be able to take their apps with them, they will need to wait for new apps to be written). They have thrown out the complete user experience of Windows Mobile and are using the Zune interface, which received critical acclaim in the US. They've thrown out the sync center, which has been the mainstay of synchronising data between the computer and the mobile device for over a decade and are taking a page out of Apple's book and doing all of the syncing through Zune Player (the Zune devices equivalent of iTunes).

This is the sort of turnaround we haven't seen, since Windows 95 came along and MS were caught on the wrong foot with the Internet and had decided to go the AOL encapsulated experience route, with MSN, then, within 8 or 9 months, they had done a 180° turnaround and launched Internet Explorer...

I think there is nothing wring with having a sync program for syncing phones. As long as it is able to copy across music tracks, when required.

My phone is just "plug and play", I can use Windows Explorer to copy files across (which IMO is infinitely superior to having to use a specialised program). I'd never want to clap eyes on a sync program unless I was trying to sync calendars with Outlook or something.

I agree. I sync my two mobiles with ISync and it copies everything across. No need to worry about what I am copying in terms of address book data. For music I have to use BT, but that is not too difficult.

I'd certainly want a sync program to get podcasts across to it.

While drag-and-drop is good, I wouldn't like to manage my music collection using Finder/Explorer. iTunes allows me to view my music in a meaningful fashion (sort by artists/genre/album/song name/etc.) whereas in a file manager, I just get folders and files...
My library only has 1668 songs it it, if I had more I think I'd be tearing my hair out if I had to manage it with a file manager...

Most of the people I know wouldn't even know where to find Windows Explorer, let alone find their music collection and copy it across to a 'phone. on the other hand, having everything in iTunes and simply hitting the sync button is something they can just about manage to do.