Is Surface Phone Dead?

There’s a disturbing lack of rumors about the Surface Phone. I wonder if MS has killed the project.

Conversation 20 comments

  • sgtaylor5

    19 April, 2017 - 10:24 am

    <p>It's dead, Jim.</p>

  • Tony Barrett

    19 April, 2017 - 11:24 am

    <p>It's dead, it's alive, it's on life-support, it never got off the drawing board. Who knows, who cares.</p>

    • Daishi

      Premium Member
      20 April, 2017 - 9:44 am

      <blockquote><em><a href="#98852">In reply to Tony Barrett:</a></em></blockquote><p>It's <span style="color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.870588); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Schrödinger's phone</span></p>

  • jrswarr

    Premium Member
    19 April, 2017 - 11:41 am

    <p>If it is not dead , then Microsoft is actively trying to choke it to death. </p><p><br></p><p>I just hit the last straw today , with Microsoft's release of Microsoft Authenticator for Android and IOS. When Microsoft refuses to release a version of an app so central to the total user experience then they are telling me that I need to move on and pick a new phone.</p>

    • lwetzel

      Premium Member
      19 April, 2017 - 2:08 pm

      <blockquote><a href="#98864"><em>In reply to jrswarr:</em></a></blockquote><p>I use Microsoft Authenticator on my Lumia 830 all the time. </p>

      • jrswarr

        Premium Member
        20 April, 2017 - 11:22 am

        <blockquote><a href="#98940"><em>In reply to lwetzel:</em></a></blockquote><blockquote><em>Yes – I also have it – but check out the new functionality that has been added to IOS and Android.</em></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote>to quote from the blog</blockquote><blockquote>"A few people have asked if this works with&nbsp;Windows Phone version Microsoft Authenticator. Windows Phone makes up &lt;5% of the active users of our Authenticator Apps so we have prioritized getting this working with iOS and Android for now. If/When it becomes a big&nbsp;success on those high scale platforms, we will evaluate adding support for Windows Phone."</blockquote><blockquote>Windows Phone is dead – stick a fork in it.</blockquote><p><br></p>

  • Brad Sams

    Premium Member
    19 April, 2017 - 1:27 pm

    <p>Surface Phone dead, maybe.</p><p><br></p><p>Surface Mobile, no.</p>

    • skane2600

      28 April, 2017 - 12:02 pm

      <blockquote><a href="#98919"><em>In reply to Brad Sams:</em></a></blockquote><p>What exactly is Surface Mobile supposed to be? Because in many articles "Surface Mobile" == "Surface Phone" </p>

    • hrlngrv

      Premium Member
      28 April, 2017 - 4:38 pm

      <p><a href="#98919"><em>In reply to Brad Sams:</em></a></p><p>Surface Mobile? Is that for Windows 10 RT tablets which could make voice calls?</p>

  • lordbaal1

    19 April, 2017 - 1:38 pm

    <p>It was never alive to begin with. It was never announced. You can't kill something that never existed to begin. And you can't count R&amp;D.</p>

  • rameshthanikodi

    20 April, 2017 - 10:03 am

    <p>It was never alive. Rumors are rumors.</p>

  • TechnologyTemperance

    20 April, 2017 - 1:21 pm

    <p>The Surface Phone is real! It's like the Great Pumpkin. Some have claimed to have seen it, and next Halloween it will rise from a field and prove everyone wrong!</p>

  • Ezzy Black

    Premium Member
    25 April, 2017 - 12:56 pm

    <p>I was always under the impression that the Surface Phone was to be based on the new Intel mobile processor. When Intel killed development of the processor it killed the Surface Phone. The timing certainly matched up closely.</p><p><br></p><p>Not that MS might not revive the name in the future, but I think that particular iteration is as dead as they come.</p>

    • JimP

      28 April, 2017 - 11:10 am

      <blockquote><em><a href="#99894">In reply to Ezzy Black:</a></em></blockquote><p><br></p><p>There's also the possibility that the Surface Phone will be based on the new Arm processor that supports Win32 emulation.</p><p><br></p><p>Microsoft likes to claim that the Surface brand invents new categories. A phone that runs Win32 apps would indeed be a new category of phones.</p>

  • skane2600

    28 April, 2017 - 12:19 pm

    <p>Slapping the name "Surface" on a phone isn't going to change anything. Even if a Surface Phone had the fastest performance, best battery life and best camera in the industry it wouldn't matter because, with the exception of a handful of enthusiasts, nobody wants a Windows phone. BTW, all of our phones are Windows Phones.</p>

  • Jules Wombat

    28 April, 2017 - 1:37 pm

    <p>Duhh "Surface Phone" was never a thing in the first place. It was only a gossip/rumour generated by sad Windows Phone fans wanting a savour to their silly minded fantasy of saving Windows Phone. Running win 32 Apps is just a windows geek boy delusion of returning to the days of the PocketPC of the early 2000's. The world has moved on, and the future is now Android. </p>

    • skane2600

      28 April, 2017 - 2:48 pm

      <blockquote><a href="#100699"><em>In reply to Jules Wombat:</em></a></blockquote><p>I think the near-time future is both iOS and Android for smartphones and consumption-oriented tablets, but not for productivity. As I've said before, the PocketPC was the mistake of trying to make a mobile device too much like desktop Windows while Windows 8 was the mistake of trying to make desktop Windows too much like a mobile device. Obviously the success of the iPhone proves that you don't have to merge desktop and mobile to be successful. </p>

      • hrlngrv

        Premium Member
        28 April, 2017 - 4:37 pm

        <p><a href="#100713"><em>In reply to skane2600:</em></a></p><p>You don't have to merge anything if you're OK selling fewer than 10% of all microcomputers but making more than half the profits from the microcomputer market and selling maybe 1/3 of all smartphones but reaping disproportionately high profits.</p><p>OTOH, if you're MSFT and just can't conceive of a viable business without at least 90% market share, you gotta try to leverage your successes.</p><p>I'm still convinced Windows 8 was a scheme to force Windows PC users to get used to Windows Phone's UI in hopes that'd stimulate Windows phone sales.</p>

        • skane2600

          28 April, 2017 - 7:43 pm

          <blockquote><a href="#100724"><em>In reply to hrlngrv:</em></a></blockquote><p>But Apple didn't cannibalize their Mac sales by having a successful smartphone. There was never going to be a lot more market share than they already had regardless. </p><p><br></p><p>The pocket PC was an attempt to leverage the popularity of Windows but MS failed to recognize that regular Windows idioms don't translate well into a small device. Apple got it right with their finger-touch approach. </p><p><br></p><p>But Windows 8 was an attempt to leverage users rather than technologies and that was a dangerous gamble MS lost. As you say, it was an attempt to push existing users into embracing Metro/Modern/Store UIs. Ironically it was Win32 compatibility that Windows 8 maintained on the desktop that saved Windows 8 from complete disaster. Alas, the WinRT devices had no such saving grace (WP failed for different reasons since Win32 apps would be fairly useless on tiny screens). </p><p><br></p><p><br></p>

  • schooner

    03 May, 2017 - 1:58 pm

    <p>I work in a company with 13,000 employees across the country. There are 24 Windows Phones and 2 are Windows 10 Mobile. Can't get much more dead</p>


Stay up to date with the latest tech news from!

"*" indicates required fields

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Thurrott © 2023 BWW Media Group