Microsoft's Ho: The Kin is not a 'Microsoft phone'
Summary: Roz Ho -- the former head of Microsoft's Mac Business Unit, who became the leader of PMX (Premium Mobile Services) in 2007 -- wanted to make sure I knew that Kin isn't a Microsoft phone. It's a Windows Phone, she said.
For more than two years, I've been writing about Microsoft Corporate Vice President Roz Ho's baby, but she and I haven't been allowed to talk. Today, as the curtain lifted on Kin, the Microsoft Pink phones, I was finally granted a phone conversation with Ho.
Ho -- the former head of Microsoft's Mac Business Unit, who became the leader of PMX (Premium Mobile Services) in 2007 -- wanted to make sure I knew that Kin isn't a Microsoft phone. Neither of the models announced today are going to be Microsoft-branded. The Kins are Sharp phones, she said, and Sharp is just one of a number of Microsoft OEM partners on the mobile front.
"This (Kin) is another Windows Phone," Ho said.
I asked her whether other OEMs had been considered to produce the Kin phones and was told "Microsoft talks to a a lot of partners" (which I am taking as a polite "no"). I asked whether different OEMs might be developing/delivering future Kin phones and was told no comment.
My take-away: Even though it's not Microsoft-branded (beyond being a Windows Phone), the Kin is more like the Xbox and the Zune than it is like a PC, in terms of it being a "Microsoft" product.
There's lots Microsoft isn't commenting on, regarding Kin, in spite of the fact the phones launched today. Microsoft isn't commenting on device pricing, pricing of the cloud features for the phones, how/if the Kins will connect at some point to the Xbox/Xbox Live service and how Microsoft plans to make money with the devices, targeted at the 15- to 25-year-old set. (I'd guess Microsoft is planning to charge consumers for the unlimited photo/video storage in the cloud that its execs mentioned today, as well as charge for other Kin services, but so far, the company isn't sharing those particulars.)
"This is a two screens and a cloud strategy," she quipped, noting that the Kins will connect to PCs and provide users with a variety of cloud services that build on top of the company's Windows Live store, just like Windows Phone 7 will.
Ho said the Kin team has learned a lot from the Danger team that Microsoft acquired in 2008. Microsoft isn't using any of the Java-based Danger code in the new phones but did incorporate the services thinking and overall "experience" approaches from the Danger team, she said.
"We stayed true to our vision" which Microsoft decided upon before it bought Danger, Ho said. "Online cloud services were integral to the phone" from the get-go, she said. (I guess that partly explains why I first heard of "Pink" as a set of premium mobile services aimed at consumers, and only later heard Microsoft also was doing its own phone.)
Ho said to expect the Kin/PMX team to share its learnings with the larger Windows Phone team, and the Windows Phone 7 team -- and vice versa.
"Over time, expect to see a lot of alignment" among Windows Phone 7 and Kin, she said. When I asked whether this would mean we'd see things like the Kin Studio show up for Windows Phone 7 users, she declined to comment.
With the Kin, "we really started with a clean sheet of paper," Ho said. "We knew we were going to do a social phone and we really kept our focus on that."
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Microsoft's brand = poison
Microsoft's famous trait of "eating its own dogfood" has come into play again with Kin. By replacing Java with proprietary Silverlight, it has isolated itself from the J2ME ecosystem that every feature phone user enjoys. Not clever when you're a minor player in the phone biz.
I stand corrected
--Ram--
Sorry, I read it as J2EE. My old eyes. I stand corrected.
--Ram--
JME is client side
JME (formerly J2ME) is client side.
Please check => http://java.sun.com/javame
Java EE = server, Java ME = client
normally put on a server.
Java SE is their standard edition, which is
normally put on consumer devices like PCs.
Java ME is their micro edition, which is designed
for small devices like phones.
My bad, I read it as J2EE. Sorry. n/t
Disagree.
with the Microsoft name stamped on the front."
A very small group. Most people don't care
which brand it is, as long as it gets the job
done.
"Microsoft's famous trait of 'eating its own
dogfood' has come into play again with Kin."
Do you even know what the phrase means?
To eat ones own dogfood is to use the products
you develop or create in your own business.
It's a practice that IMO more companies should
be doing. It helps to highlight the strengths
and weaknesses of the product to the people who
develop the product.
"By replacing Java with proprietary
Silverlight, it has isolated itself from the
J2ME ecosystem that every feature phone user
enjoys."
Not every phone. I haven't looked much at
feature phones, but Apple's striking down stuff
like Java in their smart phones.
In addition - just because a phone has a
certain capability doesn't mean everybody is
using it. In particular, "feature phones"
aren't really expected to be as powerful as
smart phones, and aren't aimed at techies and
power users.
Disagree, too
with the Microsoft name stamped on the front."
Your response: "A very small group. Most people don't care which brand it is, as long as it gets the job
done."
Why that is not true - because people are slaves to marketing. In reality, MS is all that most people know. MS's success is not due to them being a trusted brand name or their products being good products, their success is due to being some what of a monopoly and marketing powerhouse.
With that being said, I know if I see MS on an item I stay away from it. Why? Because their product is not to be trusted. And its not about perfection, either. Nothing is really perfect. But when you pay top dollar you would like it to be all that you pay for and MS's products have never been worth the money.
Therefore, To me that name is poison. And many of my friends and associates are the same way, of course, birds of a feather....
Anyway.... the the basic point that the first guy made about the MS brand is true. And MS knows it.
Oh... the rest of your post was right on but it says nothing to change the fact the MS's name is bad.
Wrong, It proves it's not an MS phone
after a while...
But...'Although the monkey might dress in silk, monkey it still is.'
We should leave Steve Jobs out of this
Yes..
http://v
ideo.google.com/videoplay?docid=1274983729713522403#
Oops...
BTW: I really don't care about any Steve...but I could not resist...
Trying to distance themselves already I see.
Give them some benefit of doubt
exactly nailing one's trousers to the mast. But
maybe the point of this phone is to develop a
concept and you need a phone to do it, made by
someone who knows how to make a phone. If you
didn't have Sharp do it, you'd be rummaging
through cheap Chinese duplicators to come up
with something that may or may not work.
Perhaps they're hoping that the phone will be a
bit of an underground hit with the kids, and
they'll learn some lessons that two or three
iterations later will produce something mass
marketable, or at minimum spur more development
of the cloud infrastructure stuff. And yeah, no
point stamping "Microsoft" on the thing with
all the baggage that carries.
Disclaimer: in another life I worked on mobile
products/OS's.
What baggage?
It looks like the Zune is doing better then many other players on the market, with Apple and SanDisk ahead of them, so it looks as though "Microsoft" on it isn't hurting it.
I would argue that people would prefer MS on the front as opposed to some other brand they never heard of.
Microsoft logo carries baggage
industry. Today it's lost that lead, and many
of its projects are tarnished with a bad
reputation. I've not seen the market research,
but I wouldn't be surprised if the phone were
tested with and without Microsoft's logo, a
logoless phone would score better than a
Microsoft branded one.
Once upon a time Chrysler and Mitsubishi had a
joint venture to produce a sports car.
Consumers bought Mitsubishi and didn't buy
Chrysler, even though it was the same car with
another logo. I suspect that today Microsoft
consumer products would suffer from the same
kind of problem.
There's a big segment of the public that has
negative associations with Microsoft.
So how did that answer my question?
I think you're seeing something which isn't there.
How do you know
Zune? Are you saying that there's nobody who
didn't buy those things because they're from
Microsoft? I didn't buy either of them, and I
wouldn't because I am not comfortable with
Microsoft's ability to build consumer products.
Am I the only person like that in the world?
Microsoft has a lot of baggage. Specifically
Zune, PlaysForSure, (how come only commenters
on ZDNet seem to ever have heard of
PlaysForSure) and all the other spectacular
trainwrecks.
X-Box???
But here is where you messed up at:
"I would argue that people would prefer MS on the front as opposed to some other brand they never heard of."
Now this is the point I was making previously. That MS is just a popular name that people recognize. And in this world of marketing influences, popularity wins... in most cases. Therefore, as of now, seeing the MS name on something "might" still be good for sales but that will soon change as more options are made and people really get to see the difference between brands.
what a load of bs
the world? they developed the software and the hardware
(with their inhouse danger team) but it is not a microrosft
phone? gmab.
sharp will built it, sure, but foxconn is building the iphone
too and yet the iphone is not a foxconn phone. how is that?
after microsoft abandoned "plays for sure" a few years ago
for their own hardware zune line (and stapped all their
"partners" vigorously in the back), they now come out again
with their own hardware in competition to their "partners".
ouch.
but don't fear, shameless microsoft shill mary-jo will deliver
whatever message they want her to. how absurd it may be.
Just Like Apple and Google. Imagine that.
Then they drop their sellers by opening their own stores [i]in direrct competition with them[/i] while pulling support?
Then they pull out of MacWorld after they helped make Apple who they are, and start staging anouncements [i]on their own[/i]?
Google offers Android to phone manufacturers, then releases Nexus One phones [i]in direrct competition with them[/i]?
And Microsoft is different, [i]how[/i]?