So the logic is 'MSFT would be willing to effectively kill Windows Mobile if that's what it takes to launch their own phone, because Windows Mobile is so far behind already'
If MSFT do indeed do this then I would applaud them. Too often legacy products / business units get in the way of innovation, as that innovation has the potentially to cannibalize the legacy.
The question that remains is: has it taken MSFT so long to get to this point that they are already too far behind? I'd guess not - they're well practiced at coming from behind.
WinMo is not bad in the latest version. It's better than Palm by far. Like normal Windows, it largely depends on what the hardware manufacturer does with it.
It's not great by any means, but it does many things well.
I've been hearing this from a few users. But even if it is a good OS (HW config dependent) the question still remains: can MSFT make money from that business model? Will developers develop for it? If the answers are 'no', then they need a new business model, not a better OS. Maybe this new venture is it?
WinMo is fine, it's the theme or 'skin' on top of it installed by the hardware manufacturers that makes the difference. The HTC Touch has a horrible default UI, but iPhone-esque themes are available to help a bit. My Blackjack II UI is OK, with the best theme being from Samsung.
The underling OS is not the issue, it's the interface that matters. Oh and mobile IE sucks, without a "zooming" feature all mobile browsers blow.
If MSFT do indeed do this then I would applaud them. Too often legacy products / business units get in the way of innovation, as that innovation has the potentially to cannibalize the legacy.
The question that remains is: has it taken MSFT so long to get to this point that they are already too far behind? I'd guess not - they're well practiced at coming from behind.