Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 648 posts

Re: Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

#63

Post by ryl00 »

osrec wrote: post #29
haolez wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m a Linux die hard fan, but the Windows Phone was indeed a great product. I liked mine!

Never owned one, but interested about what made it great?

Flat/Metro UI, live tiles, jump lists, dark mode. (I'm still using mine as a daily driver)

Re: Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

#65

Post by ben-hudson »

gtf21 wrote: post #58

Pebble smart-watches. I had them from the original kickstarter, and eventually had a Pebble Time Round which I loved. Whilst I now would never buy a smartwatch, I think that theirs were by far the best. Slimline, with a great UI, and nice functionality, and also not locked into either mobile ecosystem. I'm not entirely sure what caused their death, but my personal view is that they tried to become too big, and I don'…

Maybe you'd be interested in http://rebble.io/

Re: Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

#67

Post by city41 »

mephitix wrote: post #24

Google Inbox. And I don’t “find my favorite Inbox features in Gmail”. If you can’t tell I’m still bitter about it :(

It’s so good and I already miss it so much I’m kinda considering attempting to clone it. At least the features I particularly liked anyway.

Re: Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

#68

Post by ksaj »

karmakaze wrote: post #55
jelling wrote: post #49

OS/2

Well OS/2 v3.0 became Windows NT so sort of succeeded, just not for IBM or in name (unless you count cash registers).

That's not particularly accurate. Windows NT was based on VMS. OS/2 is quite different. The interfaces are related, but the same is true for all Windows variants on the grand timeline.

The good news is that if you are feeling particularly nostalgic and have a 16 or 32 bit processor (or emulator), you can relive the OS/2 glory days with ArcaOS from https://www.arcanoae.com/arcaos/ It'll cost you about $130 for a personal license, but if you want it, it's still there, and still supported.

Re: Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

#69

Post by city41 »

maxxxxx wrote: post #27
belltaco wrote: post #16

Windows Phone Zune

I still don't understand how MS managed to mess up Windows Phone. My girlfriend had one for a while and it was excellent.

Windows Phone 7 didn’t come out until late 2010. Then WP8 required new hardware. By the time they could have built any kind of momentum Apple and Google were eons ahead of them.

iPhone 4 was released before WP7.

It’s a shame, my WP8 phone is still my favorite smart phone ever.

Re: Ask HN: Which great products didn't succeed?

#70

Post by quickthrower2 »

yodon wrote: post #47
maxxxxx wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WPF is still pretty much the standard on Windows but it definitely could be much better. They just abandoned it and then went on these weird detours with Silverlight, WinRT and now UWP.

I suspect the actual standard on Windows today, as hated as it is here on HN, is now Electron. The HTML based UI ecosystem is just so much richer and better supported than WPF that any theoretical advantages WPF might have are dwarfed by the practical considerations of just build it in Electron and be done with it.

Yes with VSCode being the poster child of that movement (I.e. towards web tech for desktop apps)
Post reply on HN