Yahoo denies blame for Windows Phone 7 bug

Microsoft - hoist by their own petard

The plot thickens... and added to the spice of this mix is the revelation that Microsoft have chosen (yet again) to ignore a standards based implementation (this time it's IMAP they have messed with) and go with their own mash up. But this time, the practices that maintain its monopoly in both Windows and Office software didn't work because when it comes to mobile, MS is a bit player with a track record of failure.

When are they going to ever learn that standards are there so things can work together? Ah - I forgot, they don't want to work together, they want to be the only one and they want to do everything.

Including making another mess it seems.

By SwissMac on 2 Feb 2011

So predictable...

SwissMac why bother to comment, we all know you're the resident MS hater here. I suggest you adopt a standard template for your comments, something like; "I hate everything Microsoft and I love all things Apple." Just copy and paste that into the comment box and it will save you soo much time ;-)

By rjp2000 on 2 Feb 2011

Its all a bit handbags...

Sounds like handbags to me and I would have thought there is an easy fix. But, being cynical, I suspect one or both parties are demanding money to do so. We then end up with the current scenario where they start trading vague accusations in an attempt to embarrass the other into ponying-up the cash.

By ding_jimmy on 2 Feb 2011

So wrong ...

yes, It does sound like an Apple lover rant. Anyway most of what we attribute to conspiracy is no more than incompetence.
All versions of Windows are full of stupid implementations without a grand plan. Apple on the other hand has followed a consitant, undenied policy of customer lock in and control.

By thefarhad on 2 Feb 2011

@SwissMac

"Microsoft have chosen (yet again) to ignore a standards based implementation (this time it's IMAP they have messed with"

And yet WP7 works satisfactorily with all the other IMAP mail servers. Maybe if you hold the phone the correct way....

By chapelgarth on 2 Feb 2011

@SwissMac 3!!!

And if you bothered to check out the facts before mouthing off with your normal anti MS diatribe, you would have realised its nothing to do with MS ignoring standards. Its how Yahoo and MS have interpreted the IMAP standard that's at issue here. See Ars Technica for a fuller description of the problem.

By rjp2000 on 2 Feb 2011

No surprise....

....that an Apple Fanboy would be first to comment on this article....probably posted from one of his iProducts.

"Ah - I forgot, they don't want to work together, they want to be the only one and they want to do everything"

Hmmm...pot...kettle...black. A bit like the iPod and iTunes and the app store - but you can't use your iProduct with any other non-apple source.

By everton2004 on 3 Feb 2011

Crimson Tide

Basing this on the evidence of this news article, plus the Ars Technica one. I know nothing of the actual IMAP protocol itself.

This spat reminds me of the confrontation between Gene Hackman as and Denzel Washington "Crimson Tide".

The crux of the film was that the two had diametrically opposed interpretations of what Navy Regs, combined with their orders, required them to do. So a tense stand-off ensues.

At the end of the film, it turned out they were BOTH right - Navy Regs were ambiguous in the situation they were in. So they might as well have tossed a coin to decide.

I believe this is a similar situation. In this case the standard is ambiguous enough to allow for these misunderstandings.

Microsoft are using an unusual, but still allowed, method of polling for messages.

And Yahoo's servers respond in an unusual, but still allowed way to the requests from Windows 7 Phone.

It does beg the question as to why this wasn't picked up during testing of the Windows Phone 7/Yahoo Mail combination and fixed before launch.

But, on the face of the evidence available here, I'd find Yahoo to be 70% in the wrong. In that, even if Windows Phone 7 is sending an unusual request, it shouldn't be sending back any more data than that requested.

In much the same way as if I was using a document storage firm, I would expect the box I requested back, not an entire shelf from the warehouse.

However in my view Microsoft are 30% in the wrong, for not using the normally used process within the industry.

A bit like me not using the standard retrieval form the warehouse expects, but send them a piece of paper instead that says "it's that box with the Blue Hawaii sticker on it".

I also think IETF need to take some share of the blame, for not making the protocol more explicit.


Then again, might just be the difference between the sentences "eats shoots and leaves" and "eats, shoots and leaves". That one comma makes a hell of a lot of a difference...

By Penfolduk01 on 3 Feb 2011

Just Because he's an Apple Fanboy...

Doesn't mean he's right in this case.

Microsoft have a track record of taking standards and "improving" them, so they only work with their own products.

Just look at the various HTML "extensions" they threw into Internet Explorer.

And whilst Apple are admittedly even more closed, they're entitled to be. They design the hardware. They design the software. They've never pretended to be open.

Plus, in the case of iPod/iTunes, they built up a viable legal music store, whilst the music industry was too busy burying it's head in the sand about downloads, and spending all it's time trying to shut down Napster instead.

They then became the beacon that everyone else has since tried to emulate. So much so, that the term "iPod" is used to describe music players in much the same way that "Sellotape" describes adhesive tape and "Hoover" describes vacuum cleaners.

By Penfolduk01 on 3 Feb 2011

Since when did Apple design the hardware?

@Penfolduk01

The interior of Apple Products are the same as all PCs, down to using the same manufacturers, eg Foxconn, Intel, etc. Granted the exterior casing and touch controls are unique to Apple, but this is no different to Dell, for PC's, Blackberry for Phones, etc.

The only real difference is the software, which if this were any other Manufacturer, the EEC or the equivalent US Body, would be screaming unfair practices. Please note this comment only applies to PC's. We are not talking about hardcoded Games Consoles here, (or for Apple more importantly the iPhone) which were always meant to be different things, although at their heart they are PC's

And the reason Apple is reluctant to let people tinker is they have a habit of helping themselves to other peoples software. Feel free to google Xerox Alto for PC's and more importantly Creative vs Apple with respect to the holy grail of iPod!

I also find it ironic that you complain about MS but make no mention of Apple's intransigence with eg Adobe, Google, Microsoft, etc.

Oh and for reference I class music players as mp3 players, possible coz I haven't bought the Apple hype like yourself.

By scooter91170 on 3 Feb 2011

@scooter91170

Apple design their own products, the cases are all unique, and whilst they might use Foxconn to do the manufacturing of the end products, the boards are designed with Apple and are not "OEM" boards - the same as HP and Dell, for example, they design their own boards and have them made by Foxconn as well, but it doesn't mean that you can buy those boards directly under one of the Foxconn brands.

Third tier PC assemblers use off the shelf components, including motherboards, but the "big" companies, E.g. Dell, HP, Sony, Fujitsu, Acer and Apple all use custom designs, which cannot be purchased retail.

For reference, I use an htc 7 Mozart, a Sony laptop, an iPhone 3GS and an iMac. my htc is connected to several IMAP servers, without any problems, but I haven't tried it with my Yahoo! account - I never use the account.

By big_D on 3 Feb 2011