WileyFox to make a Affordable B2B Windows Phone later this year

[AlTech]

WileyFox is a British phone manufacturing company which has decided to make and sell Windows Phones to Businesses using the B2B model.

 

They want to differentiate themselves from the like of Hewlett Packard by offering cheaper alternatives whilst providing

 

This is what WileyFox had to say:

Quote

"Increasingly people are screaming for costs to come down and want a good affordable device. If businesses are going to buy thousands of devices to kit out their work force, they need a good price point. That's where we're going to hit it out.

Most firms can't afford to spend £500 per device. But with us they can be assured quality and the right features.

For example, courier companies can use it to scan products and save money which is of course what they want. That is the benefit of Windows and how it's adaptable for B2B

 

It should be noted that the company previously explored Cyanogen mod devices and low cost Android devices and has experience some mild success in those areas.

 

I do think that Windows 10 Mobile will be saved by Businesses and Enterprise and I hope that WileyFox and other smaller lesser known companies are able to provide more competition in this sector.

 

http://www.windowscentral.com/british-phone-maker-wileyfox-gearing-launch-windows-phone-later-year

[vanished]

I'm surprised this isn't more common actually.  It seems to me Windows Phone would be ideal for business.

• They can be had for cheap
• They can be controlled and locked down in a way that integrates with the organizations existing security settings
• They run office of course, and mail (outlook) - all the desktop programs that are common in a business
• The lack of apps would also a) not be a problem, and b) might even be appealing since companies will know people won't be using their phones for non business stuff

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

12 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I'm surprised this isn't more common actually.  It seems to me Windows Phone would be ideal for business.

• They can be had for cheap
• They can be controlled and locked down in a way that integrates with the organizations existing security settings
• They run office of course, and mail (outlook) - all the desktop programs that are common in a business
• The lack of apps would also a) not be a problem, and b) might even be appealing since companies will know people won't be using their phones for non business stuff

Also eliminates the need for a standalone desktop or laptop for some employees thanks to Windows Continuum.

[vanished]

Just now, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

Also eliminates the need for a standalone desktop or laptop for some employees thanks to Windows Continuum.

I would say most in fact.  Obviously some jobs will require multiple Quadros and that kind of thing, but most people just need a web browser, email client, and some office apps like Excel and Word.

[SansVarnic]

This makes since. The business applications for the windows platform are pretty large. I have said this in the past that Windows has the potential to replace what Blackberry was.

[AlTech]

8 hours ago, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

Also eliminates the need for a standalone desktop or laptop for some employees thanks to Windows Continuum.

We'll need to see if the phone supports Continuum down the line. It'll need a Snapdragon 625/650 with 2GB RAM but I don't consider these specs to be too hard to get for the OEM.

[LAwLz]

13 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I'm surprised this isn't more common actually.  It seems to me Windows Phone would be ideal for business.

• They can be had for cheap
• They can be controlled and locked down in a way that integrates with the organizations existing security settings
• They run office of course, and mail (outlook) - all the desktop programs that are common in a business
• The lack of apps would also a) not be a problem, and b) might even be appealing since companies will know people won't be using their phones for non business stuff

It's not more common because Windows Mobile does not really have any advantage over iOS or Android, even for businesses.

• They are no cheaper than Android devices.
• Windows Mobile can't be integrated with AD, so it really is no different from iOS or Android when it comes to management. You need an MDM for proper control over it.
• Office and outlook are available for iOS and Android too, but the only program from that suite you really want to use on a phone is Outlook, which can easily be replaced by the stock mail apps.
• They could still use it for non business stuff if they wanted (without an MDM) so that is not really anything appealing. It's kind of a silly argument. You don't hear "we should move to GNU/Linux for our desktops because if we do, our employees won't be able to run any games!" often do you? Same argument here.

 

13 hours ago, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

Also eliminates the need for a standalone desktop or laptop for some employees thanks to Windows Continuum.

Continuum is really bad.

 

It only supports UWP, which barely anyone uses.

 

Only a few phones support it. It's not a feature that all Windows phones has.

 

The docks are quite flakey. I haven't used it in a while now, but when I tried it on a Lumia 950 XL about half a year ago, I had to unplug and plug it back in a few times because it kept freezing or being jerky. Maybe my dock was defect or something, but it did not work well. A quick Google and you can find quite a few people that have/had the same issues.

[Nowak]

Honestly, I wish them luck in trying to get through companies already established on Android and iOS  

 

They'll need it lmao

[r3d3mpt10n]

I had a Wifeyfox Swift, as Orange were in South Africa for a year and a bit. Not a bad phone given the price. Curious to see what this ends up looking like

[vanished]

9 hours ago, LAwLz said:

It's not more common because Windows Mobile does not really have any advantage over iOS or Android, even for businesses.

• They are no cheaper than Android devices.
• Windows Mobile can't be integrated with AD, so it really is no different from iOS or Android when it comes to management. You need an MDM for proper control over it.
• Office and outlook are available for iOS and Android too, but the only program from that suite you really want to use on a phone is Outlook, which can easily be replaced by the stock mail apps.
• They could still use it for non business stuff if they wanted (without an MDM) so that is not really anything appealing. It's kind of a silly argument. You don't hear "we should move to GNU/Linux for our desktops because if we do, our employees won't be able to run any games!" often do you? Same argument here.

• Well, I suppose it depends which ones you compare to   Obviously something like an S7 costs more than the $99 I paid for my Lumia 650, but I understand those are at two totally different spec grades.  Of course, you could get very cheap android phones, or older, once high-end android phones, such as <insert spying Chinese brand here> or something like an S3, but those each have their own issues.  Not to mention, (and I suppose I could be wrong but) I'm under the impression that the experience on a cheap Android device would not be enjoyable, much like how running Windows 10 on a PC designed for 98 wouldn't go brilliantly.
• But it does have this thing where if you sign in with a Microsoft business account (you know, where you use this page, and the domain of the email address is customized to that of your company/school) it will say "some settings on this device are managed by your organization", and it gives them the ability to set up things like how updates happen, etc.  I think the list is rather extensive but I've not ever used that feature.
• True, but they don't come pre-installed.  Now, you might think "who cares, installing them is trivial" but consider the following:
  • To the best of my knowledge, to install them you must be signed into a Google account (or the apple equivalent) so that you can go through the store - the only way to do it.  I'd imagine there are very few people without a Google account, but from a company perspective, it seems logical to me they'd prefer a system where you can just sign in with your corporate Microsoft account and not have to bring personal things into it.
  • Then there's the download and install time
  • and then, you still have to sign into a Microsoft account once they're in.  The way Windows Phone is setup, you login at the device level with a Microsoft account that automatically gets you in to all the Microsoft apps (much in the way you sign in with Google on an android phone and it works will all the Google apps)
  • Again, that all may sound trivial, but it does take time, and when you're setting up hundreds of phones for a company, who knows, that might factor into the consideration for some.
• yes that was meant more as a joke  

9 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Continuum is really bad.

 

It only supports UWP, which barely anyone uses.

That is one serious limitation I think they need to fix before it has any real value.

9 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Only a few phones support it. It's not a feature that all Windows phones has.

To be fair, there's legitimate hardware reasons for that.  Not being x86, and/or just being woefully under-powered for a desktop experience are two of them.

9 hours ago, LAwLz said:

The docks are quite flakey. I haven't used it in a while now, but when I tried it on a Lumia 950 XL about half a year ago, I had to unplug and plug it back in a few times because it kept freezing or being jerky. Maybe my dock was defect or something, but it did not work well. A quick Google and you can find quite a few people that have/had the same issues.

rip.  Didn't know about that and obviously that should be another high priority for them.

[Sniperfox47]

32 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

• Well, I suppose it depends which ones you compare to   Obviously something like an S7 costs more than the $99 I paid for my Lumia 650, but I understand those are at two totally different spec grades.  Of course, you could get very cheap android phones, or older, once high-end android phones, such as <insert spying Chinese brand here> or something like an S3, but those each have their own issues.  Not to mention, (and I suppose I could be wrong but) I'm under the impression that the experience on a cheap Android device would not be enjoyable, much like how running Windows 10 on a PC designed for 98 wouldn't go brilliantly.

There are business oriented Android options like Motorola's mc40 line that are actually really good. The mc40 is a small tablet/handheld scanner and not a phone though some models do have LTE. I'm using it just as an example because I can't recall what Motorola's business phone lineup is called.

 

Also keep in mind that Android is designed to run on a huge range of hardware. A lot of the effects and background tasks can be tweaked or disabled by OEMs. It's not like Android only performs well on flagship devices.

 

32 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

• But it does have this thing where if you sign in with a Microsoft business account (you know, where you use this page, and the domain of the email address is customized to that of your company/school) it will say "some settings on this device are managed by your organization", and it gives them the ability to set up things like how updates happen, etc.  I think the list is rather extensive but I've not ever used that feature.

That's literally no different than Android for Work...

 

32 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

• True, but they don't come pre-installed.  Now, you might think "who cares, installing them is trivial" but consider the following:
• • To the best of my knowledge, to install them you must be signed into a Google account (or the apple equivalent) so that you can go through the store - the only way to do it.  I'd imagine there are very few people without a Google account, but from a company perspective, it seems logical to me they'd prefer a system where you can just sign in with your corporate Microsoft account and not have to bring personal things into it.
  • Then there's the download and install time
  • and then, you still have to sign into a Microsoft account once they're in.  The way Windows Phone is setup, you login at the device level with a Microsoft account that automatically gets you in to all the Microsoft apps (much in the way you sign in with Google on an android phone and it works will all the Google apps)
  • Again, that all may sound trivial, but it does take time, and when you're setting up hundreds of phones for a company, who knows, that might factor into the consideration for some.

A lot of the business Android devices like the mc40 lineup are designed to be imaged, and can have applications sideloaded into the image. So you take a device, load it up however you need it, image it, and then push that image to all of the 500 devices you're setting up. You don't typically manually set up all of them.

[vanished]

4 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

That's literally no different than Android for Work...

 

A lot of the business Android devices like the mc40 lineup are designed to be imaged, and can have applications sideloaded into the image. So you take a device, load it up however you need it, image it, and then push that image to all of the 500 devices you're setting up. You don't typically manually set up all of them.

Oh, alright good to know