Gizmodo 
Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
tips@gizmodo.com
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | Email | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
Email | AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Jesus Diaz
Email | AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
Email | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
Email | Twitter
Sean Fallon
Email | Twitter
Jack Loftus
Email | Twitter
John Herrman
Email | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Email
Chris Mascari
Email
Danny Allen
Email | Twitter
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Email
Chris Jacob
Email
Comment Intern:
Nick Ellenoff | Email
Comment Account Questions:
Comments@gizmodo.com
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
10/12/09
10/12/09
The first being that the platform itself was kind of shoddy. Lots of little quirks got to me, like programs not closing when I closed them, eventually causing the phone to become unstable. Additionally I always find myself having to soft reset my phone after I've been in a dead area for any lengthy period of time or else I stop getting messages (SMS/Voicemail). This was not limited to any one WinMo phone either.
Second of which was the lack of decent QWERTY phones. Most of them didn't feel right or natural.
I had always vowed to go back to the Sidekick one day. My dreams were quickly realized when I heard that Danger was bought by Microsoft. Finally, I might get to see my own Godphone realized. A Danger Sidekick hardware device with a modified version of WinMo designed especially for it.
I was excited to say the least. I had looked forward to seeing the imminent offspring of Microsoft and Danger. Now this news. This news is grim indeed. Now, not only will I not get my dream phone, but I will never see another new Sidekick again.
All hail Microsoft, the dream eater.
10/12/09
10/13/09
Microsoft's consumer OS business (ie. Windows) is worth billions and represents a significant portion of Microsoft's annual profits.
However, even the top heads at Microsoft have known for the better part of a decade now, that desktop computing is not the future of consumer level computing.
Look around you, between setop boxes, netbooks, smartphones, etc., the shift away from the desktop is already happening and at an alarming rate. All this before Cloud became a seriously viable option as well.
With the slow decimation of traditional desktop computing, Microsoft is ultimately looking at the complete erosion of their consumer level OS business - they have maybe a decade left before it all goes poof.
Modern business is all about profit and appeasing the all powerful share holders. You do not lose upwards to 70% of your revenue stream and get to remain a viable business. But over the next decade, this is exactly the scenario that is looking to play out for Microsoft, unless they do something.
Change. The only constant in the universe. Also, the only option for Microsoft. You can view this particular change at Microsoft in one of three ways.
1 - there are not too many (recession proof, even) industries which are even big enough to by itself, replace Microsoft's consumer level OS business outright. The nigh insatiable entertainment industry (games, music, films, television, etc.) is just such an industry. Over the next decade, should Microsoft gain a sizable enough toehold into the entertainment industry, gains from it would offset losses in an ever shrinking consumer OS industry - crisis averted.
2 - telecommunications is an even larger industry than entertainment. And with consumer level computing leaving the desktop for more mobile waters, it only makes sense to follow where the buffalo wherever they may roam and pursue the consumer into portable waters.
So once again, over the course of the next decade, should Microsoft get a sizable toehold in the telco/mobile devices industry, once again they are looking at an offset in future loses in the consumer OS side of their business.
3 - Even more interesting, is the fact that entertainment experiences are the "killer app" for the entire mobile computing/mobile telco industry. Let's face facts, what would an iPhone be without the ability to sync with iTunes, play music, videos and games? It'd be a pretty shitty experience that no one in their right mind in this day and age would play $200 for, subsidized or not. Why would we really need the speeds of 3G, 3.5G or 4G networks were it for the entertainment these networks allow to be piped to mobile devices?
Why get a toehold in one multi-billion industry, when you could get a toehold in two. Two industries as fortune would have it, which are linked like conjoined twins. Even should Microsoft fail to get a proper toehold into one, if they still managed to succeed at getting a toehold into the other, they still wind up getting a toehold into both by default.
In short, the answer to your question is foresight and the necessity that this foresight brings with it. There is little doubt that Microsoft's enterprise divisions are in any immediate danger of going the way of the dodo. However, their entire consumer OS division is maybe a decade from going belly up in the bottom of the toilet. The safer bet would be to continue to push deeper into enterprise solutions (which they are, believe it or not). However, the biggest payoffs are where mobile computing, telecommunications and entertainment overlap. And this is why we are not likely to see Microsoft (and for that matter, every other multi-national on the planet), walk away from trying to be the hot stepper at that party, anytime soon.
Compared to what they stand to win in the long run, the failure of Sidekick and Pink are less than a drop in the bucket. They'll learn more from this failure and later profit more from the knowledge they have gained, than they ever lost. Look at the situation with Rare (as someone pointed out above) as an example. They lost $350 million acquiring Rare. They made mistakes, and now Rare is a pale shadow of what they used to be. However, the hard lessons they learned from that clusterfuck, having now been applied, have yielded a turnaround for their games division, which has gone from over a billion in the hole, to turning a profit of over a billion a year.
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/13/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
[www.motorola.com]
10/06/09
But its a sure-fire guarantee that once I comment on a Motorola article that Ponies is going to make some crazy un-called for rude comment which I simply cannot understand. Something is up and I don't know what it is but, I don't like it when anyone treats me like shit AND commenters that have been around for a while normally stick together. And don't make troll-like comments at eachother. I could understand if I ripped on him on Gizmodo, but I never made a rude comment at him. Considering that I have significant work experience at Motorola and know their products very very well, I am well suited to make comments about what I believe to be Motorola's products, good or bad.
10/06/09
@LindsayJoy's MBP is into S+M: Comment drama isn't my thing, unless it's funny, which it sorta ain't. And you know Gizmodians like me that like to keep it in the lolosphere. . I dunno what the heck is going on on your end, but maybe we can try to be more serial/insightful/self-deprecating. Looking through your comment history, you've been fairly honest with your take on moto (mostly convincing me and likely many others that I was right to stay away from Moto #)$(#U%$)@!!ware). I didn't see any jumping up and down over the Cliq (unless bouncy video is included). As far as this whole stint goes, I don't wanna get into soap threads. You're right about vet comments sticking together (GSD would kill a million men in my honor - so he says). I understand your position would probably not be at liberty to dish everything, (though I'm sure Giz & others would love to have more insiders abound).
On a more general note, the only drama I want us vet commenters to have is funny drama, but comment friction is a lot like real friction. It can be good, when it's amusing, but right now, what you're referring to is decidedly unfun. If it doesn't make me laugh, it makes me itchy, and hungry, and I don't like being itchy and hungry. I prefer the heady days of popcicle summer camp threads where we myspace'd it up. We already have to deal with Gizmodo's ever changing comment system, that sends many older comments to commit suicide (poor iAirshirk whatever his name was). Anyways, us familiars should defend one another, and all that good stuff, against the ever growing onslaught of Trollus Noobus that infect the blogosphere from time to time. So c'mon my Giz chickadees, where's the love?
10/06/09
Oh Robert, stop giving me good bouncy ideas. Lets take this to the playground cause we are realllly gettin off topic!
Anyhoo, the "turtle" with the non-android interface ran P2K which was realllllllly craPPPaaaY. I tested it and it was no pleasure. And much bigger then it looks too.
10/05/09
10/05/09
I agree the phone should die, but not everything should be seeking market dominance.
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/05/09
I have to echo some of the other comments about the ZHD. Microsoft would be stupid to ignore that wonderful design for a phone. I mean, it's freaking perfect. It doesn't even need a slider (though maybe a "pro" or something can be made, like the HTC) The size and feel of the Zune HD is sublime, and would make a fantastic cell handset.
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
And more to the point, do you guys really think Microsoft would have put out a touch screen device if Apple hadn't already done it first? I mean, it's not like that haven't been into mobiles forever.
Yeah, yeah, I know, the ZuneHD is not rounded, but in every other aspect, it's just like the iPhone.
10/06/09
I always forget that Microsoft rips off Apple from the future...
10/06/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
I didn't think so.
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
12/10/08
12/10/08