QUOTE(BuFung @ Oct 20 2010, 10:40 PM)
kind of agree on what u said..
ya.. I do think they have difficulty have active 2 layers concurrently to be touch together...
I m not sure will u agree on me.. Microsoft have touch OS soooooo many years in mobile, even before symbian?? they have improve the OS and try to make it friendly as possible.. do not forget they are pure software ppl... hardware part they leave it to other vendor except giving them the requirement... at the end of the day.. they still force to abandon the OS.. and re-write an entirely new one.. which have totally new concept....
already a very good example with MS.. do u think Nokia keep improving the symbian is the way to go?? to me.. I don't see the light infront of this...
Well, if you do start from scratch, do like what Microsoft did, because that is the right way to go.
Before this, WM manufacturers can do any combination of hardware they like, just like windows. Of course, people buying low end, 200Mhz chip phone will say lag, those that use Marvell's 600+Mhz will say damn fast, and people come out with polarizing opinions. Just like what Android is doing today.
Now Microsoft already put their foot down, and list out minimum hardware specs before you can make one. Thanks to that, Microsoft narrows down the coding they have to do to a spesific base configuration - improves user experience tremendously and ensure that the experience between manufacturers not that jarring like WM6 last time.
Same like palm. Write from scratch, everyone says webOS very good mobile OS, but crap hardware torpedoed the phone early on.
Guess what? Two mobile OS that is evolutionary/fix what we have rather than revolutionary/write from scratch have the trivial, but seemed unfixable issues. They are Symbian and Blackberry. Both are in trouble on the smartphone front. (Nokia safe la because they manufacture cheap, AK47 class phones - got a spare Nokia flash phone just in case

)