Comments on: Microsoft Renames Windows Mobile 6 to Standard, Professional, Classic http://www.crunchgear.com/2007/01/29/microsoft-renames-windows-media-6-to-standard-professional-classic/ Gadgets, gear and computer hardware. Sun, 08 Nov 2009 20:19:32 -0500 hourly 1 By: Jim Marchant http://www.crunchgear.com/2007/01/29/microsoft-renames-windows-media-6-to-standard-professional-classic/comment-page-1/#comment-414637 Jim Marchant Mon, 10 Sep 2007 13:21:09 +0000 http://crunchgear.com/2007/01/29/microsoft-renames-windows-media-6-to-standard-professional-classic/#comment-414637 Some programs cannot be used with the Standard version of Mobile 6.0, Expensable being one. As an end user, I found this out when I attempted to interpret the classifications of Professional, Standard, and Classic. Expensable is an important program to me, so I find my smartphone's use of Standard disheartening. It will not work with it. The web site helps me to appreciate these differences. Very much appreciated. Jim Marchant Some programs cannot be used with the Standard version of Mobile 6.0, Expensable being one. As an end user, I found this out when I attempted to interpret the classifications of Professional, Standard, and Classic.

Expensable is an important program to me, so I find my smartphone’s use of Standard disheartening. It will not work with it.

The web site helps me to appreciate these differences. Very much appreciated.

Jim Marchant

]]> By: seven card stud poker online http://www.crunchgear.com/2007/01/29/microsoft-renames-windows-media-6-to-standard-professional-classic/comment-page-1/#comment-290169 seven card stud poker online Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:34:12 +0000 http://crunchgear.com/2007/01/29/microsoft-renames-windows-media-6-to-standard-professional-classic/#comment-290169 This is a great web site. I have some great web pages myself if you are interested to share. But I should not go on about my site too much, that is not fair, right? This is a great web site. I have some great web pages myself if you are interested to share. But I should not go on about my site too much, that is not fair, right?

]]> By: ehjeje http://www.crunchgear.com/2007/01/29/microsoft-renames-windows-media-6-to-standard-professional-classic/comment-page-1/#comment-171894 ehjeje Mon, 02 Apr 2007 15:41:23 +0000 http://crunchgear.com/2007/01/29/microsoft-renames-windows-media-6-to-standard-professional-classic/#comment-171894 gggdd gggdd

]]> By: Kent Pribbernow http://www.crunchgear.com/2007/01/29/microsoft-renames-windows-media-6-to-standard-professional-classic/comment-page-1/#comment-82745 Kent Pribbernow Tue, 30 Jan 2007 02:45:51 +0000 http://crunchgear.com/2007/01/29/microsoft-renames-windows-media-6-to-standard-professional-classic/#comment-82745 Oh good lord. Could we please dispense with the incessant accusations that Windows Mobile is somehow a hideously bad mobile operating system, filled with broken glass and nails, lacerating any who touch it? I mean, really - this is just silly. Granted, it may not have the best UI on the market, or offer spectacular usability, but to describe it as a "horror" is fallacious. It's the most solid development environment of any platform in the industry. And for many users the UI offers a familiar environment that is easy to adapt to. And can you think of a better option that offers better overall platform? Palm OS is dead, so there's no point making comparisons with it. Not to mention that Garnet is painfully obsolete already. Blackberry? Dear God - talk about an ugly UI. A one-trick pony platform. Symbian? Not bad for a feature phone, but Symbian S60 barely meets the criteria for a true "Smartphone" platform. And it's a mess to develop for. And if you want to experience the true definition of "horror" in a mobile platform, just look at any Motorola RAZR and behold the spectacle that is Motorola's feature phone OS. YUCK! So, all in all, Windows Mobile doesn't look so bad. Oh good lord. Could we please dispense with the incessant accusations that Windows Mobile is somehow a hideously bad mobile operating system, filled with broken glass and nails, lacerating any who touch it? I mean, really – this is just silly.

Granted, it may not have the best UI on the market, or offer spectacular usability, but to describe it as a “horror” is fallacious. It’s the most solid development environment of any platform in the industry. And for many users the UI offers a familiar environment that is easy to adapt to. And can you think of a better option that offers better overall platform?

Palm OS is dead, so there’s no point making comparisons with it. Not to mention that Garnet is painfully obsolete already.

Blackberry? Dear God – talk about an ugly UI. A one-trick pony platform.

Symbian? Not bad for a feature phone, but Symbian S60 barely meets the criteria for a true “Smartphone” platform. And it’s a mess to develop for.

And if you want to experience the true definition of “horror” in a mobile platform, just look at any Motorola RAZR and behold the spectacle that is Motorola’s feature phone OS. YUCK!

So, all in all, Windows Mobile doesn’t look so bad.

]]> By: Elodie http://www.crunchgear.com/2007/01/29/microsoft-renames-windows-media-6-to-standard-professional-classic/comment-page-1/#comment-82711 Elodie Tue, 30 Jan 2007 01:58:26 +0000 http://crunchgear.com/2007/01/29/microsoft-renames-windows-media-6-to-standard-professional-classic/#comment-82711 you're...being sarcastic, right? you’re…being sarcastic, right?

]]>