Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cellphones Operating Systems Open Source Linux

Samsung's First Tizen Smartphone Gets Leaked 153

Posted by Soulskill
from the finally-arriving-to-market dept.
SmartAboutThings writes "We are less than a month away from seeing the first ever Tizen smartphone from Samsung. The leaked image points toward a Feb. 24th launch date at MWC 2014 in Barcelona. The phone design is very similar to Galaxy phones, while the UI reminds us of Windows Phone 8. Samsung is also one of the world's top smartphone vendors, so it should have a decent chance at developing a mobile OS of its own, don't you think?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Samsung's First Tizen Smartphone Gets Leaked

Comments Filter:
  • Bada (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @06:14AM (#46098395)

    Samsung already tried this with Bada ... and failed.
    Now they are taking others on board to try to displace Google. Will it succeed? Don't think so.

    • Re:Bada (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Stormwatch (703920) <rodrigogirao@@@hotmail...com> on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @07:06AM (#46098551) Homepage

      Wasn't Bada only used in low-end devices? This one seems to be rather high-end.

      • by gl4ss (559668)

        why make it look like wp8 then?

        this test device is high end.. but the devices on the end of the plan are the lower end which are currently bada, bada doesn't allow them easy enough customization and features to go easily for the better-chips cheap phones that are on the way in 2-3 years.

        *** now this could have been said about some other os's years ago too. exact same fucking plan. bada already replaced their internal fuckfest of several os's with just about the same justification. also it is their insurance

      • Samsung Wave phones were pretty decent phones. No, not phablets with gazzilion of everything and the kitchen sink. Just a very good smartphone, with decent browser and some level customization.

        On top of that, the whole premise "Samsung develops new mobile OS" is bogus. It might have been the case with Bada, but not the case with the Tizen [wikipedia.org]:

        The Tizen Association formed to guide the industry role of Tizen, including requirements gathering, identifying and facilitating service models, and overall industry marketing and education.[4] Members of the Tizen Association represent every major sector of the mobility industry and every region of the world. Current members include operators, OEMs and computing leaders: Fujitsu, Huawei, Intel Corporation, KT, NEC CASIO Mobile Communications, NTT DOCOMO, Orange, Panasonic Mobile Communications, Samsung, SK Telecom, Sprint and Vodafone.

        What's more, Tizen isn't particularly "new". Not only there are tried bits of LiMo and Bada inside, but there were already several releases for the "In-Vehicle-Infotainm

        • Why the fuck are telecoms involved?

          That just stinks. Just what we need, more telecom control over a smartphone OS.

          • Re:Bada (Score:4, Informative)

            by ThePhilips (752041) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @07:49AM (#46098703) Homepage Journal

            By whom do you think the telecom developers are employed?

            Telecoms do lots of development and are involved in lots of connected things. There is no way around it.

            Anyway, I'd rather first wait for the Tizen phones to arrive and then evaluate them. Considering the race to bottom Google has choosen as a path forward for Android, Tizen might get a fair chance in the market. That, of course, if the Tizen would be even comparable to Android.

            • Isn't a "race to the bottom" just a natural consequence of a competitive market working properly?
              • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                by Thantik (1207112)

                This is the difference between real capitalism, and American capitalism. In real capitalism, you naturally get a race to the bottom. In American capitalism, you get government protectionism to keep your antiquated, inflated business practices afloat while you strip people of every penny you can.

                • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                  by Anonymous Coward

                  (Posting AC because I'm at work and I don't log into websites from work not because I'm unwilling to put my name behind my post.)

                  That is simply one of the most moronic things I've read on Slashdot in quite some time.

                  Or, to put it in a car analogy so you understand why I think you're utterly daft, please ask yourself which auto manufacturers make the high end cars that don't care about competing on price and which manufacturers are primarily interested in being just a bit cheaper than their competitors.

                  To pu

              • by tlhIngan (30335)

                Isn't a "race to the bottom" just a natural consequence of a competitive market working properly?

                Only to a point.

                A race to the bottom can hit a natural limit under which the only way to make it cheaper is to cut corners. See $500 laptops, cheap LCD monitors, etc, where the GPU is Intel, the screen 1366x768, etc. High res screens are available, but spendy ($300 on sale vs. $80 for 1920x1200 vs. 1080p screens, $500 laptops vs. $1000+ laptops, etc).

                You see it on Android too - the flagship phones sell tons, but

                • That sounds like a market working correctly. Most people want a cheap phone rather than the expensive flagship model and thus the market is selling more of the cheap phones.

                  480x800 sounds more than enough for most phone functions. Probably a bit small for doing any web browsing, but in my experience people would rather browse the web on a larger screen anyway. It depends on what you want, but a lot of people would buy a cheap phone (gonna drop/break/lose it soon anyway) and a cheap tablet rather than just
                • by citizenr (871508)

                  but spendy ($300 on sale vs. $800 for 1920x1200 vs. 1080p screens, $500 laptops vs. $1000+ laptops, etc).

                  Price difference between shit on a stick 1366x768 panel, and a proper 1920x1200 (or even 2K) one is about $20-40. The only other thing you need to change in the whole laptop to swap screens is flex strip connecting lcd with mb because new screen needs two LVDS channels (or is eDP instead of lvds).

                  As you can see they dont make those shitty ~720p laptops because of component cost. They force this shit on us to artificially create "luxury" (read not totally shitty) market segment.

              • Isn't a "race to the bottom" just a natural consequence of a competitive market working properly?

                Not at all. Quite the opposite, actually. "Race to the bottom" happens in a product category where the buyer cannot easily determine which value is worth more. Let's say a $1,000 laptop and a $1,100 laptop that has a better battery, longer lasting keyboard and some other advantages that you only figure out after using it for two years. Since the customer can't see a difference, they buy then one for $1,000 even if they would prefer the $1,100 one if they had known the advantages.

                So what happens? The comp

                • I see, I hadn't really considered it like that.

                  I think the tech market is somewhat different to most markets in that a good product today is an obsolete product (still functional, but not desired) in a years time. This means that companies can easily get away with rubbish components as most tech is virtually disposable. In markets with longer product lifespans, it's easier for quality manufacturers to distinguish themselves and get a name for quality, but most people don't care if a laptop from 10 years a
            • Telecoms do lots of development and are involved in lots of connected things. There is no way around it.

              Apple disagrees with you.

              • LOL. Apple has hired quite a lot of telecom developers back then. That's how first rumors about iPhone have started: journalists/etc seen the job openings at Apple.

                Or you think developers of all kinds grow on trees?

                • Do you think Telecom Developers are the same as Telecoms?

                  Idiot.

                  • Do you think Telecom Developers are the same as Telecoms?

                    Sorry, I forgot that in USA the companies are people too. Especially telecoms who just have life of their own, completely independent from the the people who actually work there.

                    Idiot.

                    Imbecile.

        • by the_B0fh (208483)

          I could have sworn Samsung only recently joined Tizen, so they weren't even part of the founders of Tizen.

          • I haven't followed Tizen much previously. As far as I know, it picked up quite a lot from other previous Linux-based mobile OSs. Samsung AFAIK played big role in the push into mobile phones by bringing in the components from Bada (the interface for non-native, managed run-time) and also the Android compatibility layer. (Interesting bit: Nokia provided to Tizen the navigation app and maps.)

            My interested in Tizen piqued only recently, when updates for Google Apps started removing functionality and crippling

    • Re:Bada (Score:4, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @07:10AM (#46098561)

      Will it succeed? Don't think so.

      The guy writing the article is certain it'll fail. He keeps saying its like WP8.

    • by fatphil (181876)
      Samsung were much smaller at the time. They are now pretty much dominant, with a good name, and plenty of marketting muscle.

      One of the benefits of Tizen is that it does run on both low end devices and high end ones, so they've got plenty of pots to dip their paws into. It's lower maintenance than Android, as there's much more standard upstream packages, less specific to the platform, and it's way-way-way more open than any other platform. (Though not quite as much as I would have liked.) Will it succeed? I'
    • by MrDoh! (71235)
      With Samsung throwing masses of cash at it, it should get a decent enough market share. There'll be a fair few people going into these new Samsung physical stores wanting 'a Samsung phone' and they'll be pushed to these over Android.
    • Now they are taking others on board to try to displace Google.

      But why would they want to? It can't be for the cost..

      • by fatphil (181876)
        It can. They pay Google to ship Android on their devices.
        • by fatphil (181876)
          Well, this would have been my source:
          http://www.theguardian.com/info/2014/jan/27/1
          But they pulled it, as apparently it's not the case any more. Things must have changed several times in the last few years, as I've heard of costs higher than 75c/unit historically.

          Presumably they get all the money just from (advertisers who want) users using their services.
    • Why not. They've made Android successful and own its market so why not try and cut Google out before they try and ruin it?
  • I don't think so (Score:5, Insightful)

    by loufoque (1400831) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @06:15AM (#46098399)

    Being one of the top hardware vendors doesn't magically enable you to write good software.

    • Re: (Score:1, Redundant)

      by dwater (72834)

      It doesn't rule it out either...

      • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @07:17AM (#46098581) Journal

        It doesn't rule it out either...

        There's no general-case connection; but this is Samsung we are talking about here, so it's pretty safe to assume that anything they added will be about as classy as the bloatware on a Best Buy HP-Compaq at the bottom of the price range...

        If we are lucky, the BSP side might not be a total failure; but Samsung makes a hell of a mess when they try app development, at least on their android devices.

      • It doesn't rule it out either...

        From my experience working with and for HW-centric companies, they all view SW as a zero-revenue expense. As such, they don't invest in the people, tools and processes that make for successful software products.

        I'd tend to think being a top h/w vendor is actually a detriment to delivering good software.

      • by the_B0fh (208483)

        Seeing that the S4 uses double the storage of the base Android, yeah it does, since whatever they added does not double the value you get out of the phone, compared to base Android.

        • by dwater (72834)

          hrm, I wonder...I have noticed on my travels the ubiquity of non-Google Android devices. I wonder if the value of *those* is doubled.

          I am, of course, assuming you mean, by 'base Android', the one which is installed on Nexus devices - ie it doesn't have all the manufacturer-added software? If you instead consider 'base Android' to be what is available for free, then perhaps it does indeed add value since it is otherwise quite simple, constituting just a platform.

          I think people in 'the west' seem to think And

    • Being one of the top hardware vendors doesn't magically enable you to write good software.

      It might make you code at producing gazillions of ROMs, or flash drives, or DVDs, containing the good software, because that's what hardware is about, but it doesn't make you good at writing good software.

    • by Tsolias (2813011)
      Being one of the top of anything can help you become the top of something else. Do you know what you need to make good sw? good programmers. Do you know what you need to get them? money. Does Samsung have money? Yes. So, can Samsung be a company with good software, if its CEO wants it? Yes. Does the hw business help you make good sw? Yes. Do you know how? OFC, you have your own platform that sells like shit and then you can make the sw and optimize it for you own platform. Do you know any other company th
      • by loufoque (1400831)

        You need money, but money is not sufficient to get good programmers of the level they'd need to be able to compete with iOS and Android.

        • by gbjbaanb (229885)

          true, the best programmers (like CEOs) work more for the joy of working. Those who only come because you throw bucketloads of cash at them tend to be interested in only 1 thing, and that ain't the work you need them doing.

          Still, from another post: "Samsung uses EFL as UI framework and has in it's payroll Carsten Haitzler (Rasterman) and Cedric Bail, the main developers of Enlightenment".

          Doesn't sound too bad now.

        • by gutnor (872759)

          That's not just the developers that are the problem. The overall environment need to be adapted for those developers to work: what are the processes, the managers, IT, environments, ... I have seen shop where corporate policy prevent a developer to be admin, install software and use another browser than IE7. Others where you have several months of lead time to setup a new database test server, where you cannot run a compiler locally, where only a manager can access the source control system. where bugs can

    • Being one of the top hardware vendors doesn't magically enable you to write good software.

      Actually being one of the top hardware vendors does magically enable you to write good software.

      • by loufoque (1400831)

        Not at all. Hardware-centric people are known for writing very bad software.

        • Old joke: What's the most dangerous hazard in a lab? A software developer who got hands on a soldering iron

          Typical reply: What's the most dangerous hazard in SW development? An electrical engineer who gained access to the compiler.

          (Both somewhat true, although both with exceptions.)

    • by w_dragon (1802458)
      HP being a good example. Their hardware is generally solid, but every piece of software they're associated with is crap. This includes drivers, most firmware, and pure software (QTP is overpriced and broken, their diameter api crashes as often as it works). I suspect that the process for building good hardware is so different from the process for good software that companies have trouble doing both.
    • I don't even know why they would. A new OS could be written to run Androids current apps, sure, but further fragmentation of the ecosystem wouldn't help either party and Samsung has the most to lose. They know this.

      I'm all for a multiOS mobile culture today. I've owned phones with 4 distinctly different OSs on them and each has their pros and cons. I just don't feel that yet another player, even the size of Samsung, is going to make much headway in the current market. Though I will say Samsung is probably
    • but being Rasterman does!
      we don't need another phone os. but if we can get one that runs as fast enlightenment it could be worth a try.

      • by loufoque (1400831)

        Maybe it will be as successful as Rasterman's previous mobile OS project, OpenMoko.

        • by Zimluura (2543412)

          Hahaha, always a possibility. Though I had thought OpenMoko's lack of success wasn't about it being poorly written, and iirc, that's what you were questioning here.

          To clarify, I think Tizen will have an uphill battle:
          * Android has a massive head start, and is easy to pick up if you know some C.
          * Macolytes generally won't consider anything other than "their precious".

          but, if i had to pick a mobile os based on efficient use of hardware resources, Tizen would be worth a look just from its pedigree.

    • by hajile (2457040)
      Tizen's biggest problem is samsung. Here's a chat log where rasterman (head of EFL used by Tizen in the background -- they aren't allowing anything but webapps by third parties)

      https://www.tizen.org/irclogs/... [tizen.org]

      He talks about how stagnant and copycat the Samsung development bureaucracy is and how it's practically impossible to make any real innovative moves in development.

      Another major issue is that the Tizen SDK (despite all the "Linux Foundation" mantra) is proprietary and gives Samsung near comp
  • by rodrigoandrade (713371) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @06:47AM (#46098501)
    Yes, I think Tizen will ultimately flop for a variety of reasons, not the least of which being the fact that Samsung will need to support THREE different operating systems.

    But in the end, competition is always good for consumers. Bring it on!!
    • by hattig (47930)

      Does Tizen support Android apps in any manner? (i.e., in a manner like BlackBerry 10 supports Android apps).

      If not, the software ecosystem is going to be very poor, and kill the device.

      If it does, then third-party native software is probably never going to get written.

      • by gmuslera (3436)
        Sailfish, that is a Tizen cousin, can run android apps in a similar way that does BB10. And if it supports QT will have easier to port native apps from Meego (that have already a good enough core apps package), native BB10 ones, or even Ubuntu Touch.
    • by Tom (822)

      But in the end, competition is always good for consumers.

      Actually, I don't think that's always true. The smartphone market is a good example for why. First, you end up with 1000 different Android phones (let's ignore iOS for the moment) that have tiny differences amongst themselves, leading to a choice paradox (you can't decide because there's so many options).

      Second, because the market is so crowded with so many so similar products, it's hard for a vendor to really innovate. What we see is rapid evolution, but not innovation - everyone is moving forward at break

      • by Microlith (54737)

        Competition is good, but in markets like the US where the mobile space is functionally broken due to the business models of the carriers, you can't enjoy innovation.

        How many players are actually in the market?

        Shockingly few, mostly those willing to crank out new handsets every 6 months (Samsung, HTC, et. al.) to comply with carrier demands or the single US example of Apple, who can build a single hardware platform and deliver one new handset to carriers per year.

        Where are the small, innovative underdogs?

        The

      • 'The form factor, for example, has largely standardized on the iPhone +/- some deviation in size."

        That's a bit disingenuous. You have almost every vendor offering tiny 3 inch smartphoned and their range goes all the way up to 5 inches, with 6inch "phablets" filling the gap to tablets.

        I don't see any lack of design variety either. Rounded or square, Metal or plastic, thick or thin, and soon curved screens are all taking part. You also have some very risky type of gimmicks, like waterproof phones and a smart

        • by Tom (822)

          That's a bit disingenuous. You have almost every vendor offering tiny 3 inch smartphoned and their range goes all the way up to 5 inches, with 6inch "phablets" filling the gap to tablets.

          You are talking about size. I was talking about form factor.

          Oh wow, some have rounded edges! Sorry, you weren't around in the first mobile phone market, were you?

          • Maybe you should elaborate your argument instead of being so pretentious.
            The popular GSM phones of the late 90s were candybars with numeric keypads.
            In case you didn't know, you can still buy these phones, ranging from the most basic to relatively sophisticated feature phones. They don't run Smartphone OSs which require large touchscreens.

            Furthermore there have been recent attempts at selling smartphone flip phones and sliders which were popular in the 2000s. The reason you don't see more is because they don

    • by Sockatume (732728)

      How is three different ways to give Samsung your money "competition"?

  • by Zaatxe (939368) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @06:50AM (#46098507)
    ...if they ditch Android, I'll ditch Samsung.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      ...if they ditch Android, I'll ditch Samsung.

      I bet they are shaking in their boots

    • by Herve5 (879674)

      Well, for me seeing an operational open-source OS on a phone would indeed *trigger* my first buying of a Samsung phone.
      I own an Openmoko, have carefully reviewed the Jolla phone recently (alas: not operational, IMHO) and believe Samsung indeed is capable to succeed here.

    • by q.kontinuum (676242) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @07:49AM (#46098699)
      Actually, Tizen might be a reason for me to give them a shot. Unless I get a budget-friendly device with Sailfish OS first :-)
      • by Herve5 (879674)

        Just some weeks ago I was ready to pay a premium to get a Jolla phone (with Sailfish); I went up to registering into Sailfish newsgroups etc.
        Honestly, and it's sad to say: the OS looks cool but there are just no applications at all. Not even a decent email, not even an ad-filter.

        I sincerely hope Jolla succeeds, but I cannot invest now hoping next year the phone will work.
        In contrast the enormous size of Samsung (an issue of its own) may at least bring a machine that works upon switchon...
        But I'll definitely

        • SailfishOS has an Android runtime, so Android apps should run on the device. They also plan to provide images compatible with standard Android hardware, claiming that e.g. in the Chinese market it is common for users to pimp their phones with custom roms. So, I might wait for first reviews on how well the compatibility-layer works, but if it works I wouldn't be concerned about lack of apps.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Is that same Samsung which:

    - Doesnt upgrade Android for their previous (not old) hardware?
    - Provide tablets with just one USB output? And not standard?
    - Supports only proprietary additional hardware?

    No thanks!! They can keep up with their braindead appleish hardware
    Im moving to standard chinese hardware all the time

    I hope the day i could upgrade my tablet as the same way i do upgrade my PC
    Until there, there's little value added at all

    At the time the first chinese hardware manufactures releases their first

  • Nice phone (Score:5, Informative)

    by reboot246 (623534) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @07:18AM (#46098585) Homepage
    with a butt-ugly interface.

    No sir, I don't like it.
  • Just because it has widgets arranged on the screen, does not make it a Metro UI. I could do that with an android phone.

  • markets (Score:4, Informative)

    by Tom (822) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @08:14AM (#46098777) Homepage Journal

    Samsung is also one of the world's top smartphone vendors, so it should have a decent chance at developing a mobile OS of its own, don't you think?

    No. These are two different markets and being a good hardware vendor doesn't mean you're a good OS developer. It worked for Apple, because they are neither - they are a design-focussed company.

    So Samsung or not makes no difference. Let's see what the product is like.

  • Tizen uses EFL (Score:3, Informative)

    by Niznaika (913305) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @08:29AM (#46098835) Homepage
    I see a lot of distrust of the Tizen interface, and even though I'm not a big fan of tiles, Samsung uses EFL as UI framework and has in it's payroll Carsten Haitzler (Rasterman) and Cedric Bail, the main developers of Enlightenment, which I think, grants that the end product will be quite good.
  • by Simulant (528590) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @08:45AM (#46098881) Journal
    ...but only if they can release OS updates for 1-2 years after a phone's release.

    My experience with Samsung, (my first 3 android phones were Samsung), is that they tend to ship and forget. They showed no loyalty to me and so I never developed any loyalty to them. I think they got where they are by market saturation rather than any real, inherent superiority of their products.
    • Wife and I are shopping for a new carrier and new phones. I'm getting another iPhone. I've had one since the 3G and like other Apple products I own, it stays out of my way and lets me get work done.

      But she has Samsung devices, Tablet & Phone, but every time we went in to ask questions there was someone in front of us returning a Samsung S4. Well we noticed something. We've gone to 6 different stores and every time we waited the person in front of us was returning a Samsung device, less than 30 days

  • "Leak" seems to be the new term for "press release." Samsung are just drumming up their marketing machine to promote their next product. Must have learned it from Apple Inc. Perhaps they'll "lose" a prototype somewhere (Starbucks?) so that PR marketers... ahem, "journalists" have an excuse to generate more advertising revenue for their publication(s).

    Really, this stuff is getting stale.

  • by morgauxo (974071) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @10:45AM (#46099705)

    I had a Samsung Stratosphere. It ran like shit!!!!
    Then I got an SIII. It worked for about a week.
    Now I have a Motorola phone. Ah.... Much better!

    If Samsung can't even make Android, which someone else has already done most of the coding for run well how are they going to make their own OS?!?!

    • by iONiUM (530420)

      Well, that's a great load of anecdotal shit. I have had an S3 since it came out in Canada in 2012, and it is still working fine (I've moved on to the Nexus 5, but my wife uses the S3 to this day). It has had no problems, and a few months ago I moved it to Cyanogenmod without issue.

      The hardware is fine, and it's never had an issue. So while I'm sure this new OS will probably suck, let's try to figure out why it'll suck for actual reasons, rather than the Galaxy line which is actually pretty good. Credit wher

      • by morgauxo (974071)

        Not entirely anecdotal. When my S3 died it simply turned off and never turned back on. When I searched Google I found lots of other people had the same problem with the S3. Not necessarily everybody... plenty of people love their S3s and have no problem but this particular failure mode happens to the S3 far more than is usual for other models.

        Since we are talking about Samsung developing software I must say I don't know if the problem with the S3 is hardware or software related. It sure seems like a har

    • by thegarbz (1787294)

      I had a Samsung Galaxy S1. No actually I still have it, and it still works.
      My girlfriend had an S2, no actually that one still works too.
      Both of us have S3s though she had the LTE version.
      I now have an S4.

      Not a single failure and we didn't coddle these phones even in the slightest, the S1 even has a broken screen. Yeah I tried a Motorola phone and I'm very glad I went Samsung. Dare I say I'm a fan?

      • by morgauxo (974071)

        Up through the S3 my wife had the same phones that I did. She loves her Strat and her S3.

        My Strat was great for about 2 days then it sucked. It seemed like I couldn't install much of anything on it or it would slow down to a crawl. I wasn't installing anything sketchy either, almost no games (I think I did have angry birds). Some health related stuff that my wife had too (hers worked well) and some ham radio apps. There was nothing that was likely to be infected plus on my previous phone (a Motorola Droid

  • It's a weird phenomenon, but it seems that the Japanese don't "get" system software/operating systems AT ALL.

    It almost seems to be a cultural thing. They like baroque/quirky interfaces and systems. For video games, that is often a good thing; it makes the game interesting. For applications, it sucks.

    • by citizenr (871508)

      It's a weird phenomenon, but it seems that the Japanese don't "get" system software/operating systems AT ALL.

      It almost seems to be a cultural thing. They like baroque/quirky interfaces and systems. For video games, that is often a good thing; it makes the game interesting. For applications, it sucks.

      You hit nail on the head. For more reference just read about Nintendo Wii/WiiU. They delivered TEN (10) years old development environment for the Wii (straight from GCN days). It only got worse for WiiU.

      http://www.eurogamer.net/artic... [eurogamer.net]

  • Heck, even just that screenshot looks better than WP, in that you can clearly have different size/shape tiles, and it doesn't have the stupid Fisher Price color scheme of WP. Add to that, the tile-based home screen will likely be optional, just like their similar launcher screen is on their current Android phones. Likely, they depicted it this way so there would be no question it wasn't yet another Android handset.

I find you lack of faith in the forth dithturbing. - Darse ("Darth") Vader

Working...