Microsoft is currently preparing an update for Windows Phone 8, codenamed Apollo Plus. Sources have confirmed to The Verge that Apollo Plus will bring new features to Windows Phone 8 that weren't fully in scope for the initial release. This won't be the next major version of Windows Phone, but more of a point update to push fixes and features.
We're told that Microsoft is preparing to include VPN support in Windows Phone, a missing option since the reset of Microsoft's mobile OS efforts, that will allow corporate users to connect to work systems — this feature may make it into the first Apollo Plus update. A Wi-Fi connection fix is also planned to let connections always remain on, alongside some audio improvements. Apollo Plus will also test Microsoft's ability to deliver Windows Phone 8 updates over-the-air, a change from the previous OS that required users to plug devices into PCs to get similar updates.
Microsoft has admitted it "ran out of time" on a Notification Center Windows Phone 8 feature addition, and the company will likely push additional features that failed to make the final cut as part of its upcoming update. We're told that Microsoft will be detailing Apollo Plus at Mobile World Congress in February.
Comments
‘Apollo plus’?
Just call it 8.0.1… a buig fixing u[date doesn’t need a flashy name.
By WayAway on 11.26.12 3:58pm
Bug*
Comment editing etc…
By WayAway on 11.26.12 3:58pm
Um, it’s a code name.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_name
By SilverSee on 11.26.12 4:03pm
They aren’t fixes, they’re features!
By Wisconsinated on 11.26.12 9:38pm
Completely unrelated to the comment thread, and additions such as VPN support are features.
By Lumic on 11.27.12 2:17am
It is related because the poster who I commented to said theres a codename for a reason. To which I replied that the reason for the codename would be all of those “features” /s. There shouldn’t be a new codename for bug fixes
By Wisconsinated on 11.28.12 5:31pm
so what you’re saying is that they’ll mark it in the sw/sdk as 8.1 and in the pr material 8.5?
By lassikin on 11.27.12 2:25am
7.5 was not a standard update, it was more on the caliber of, say updating from iOS 5 to 6. Therefor this will not be marketed as 8.5
By valiantsace on 11.27.12 10:31am
I LOLed at the exasperation the whole comment editing thing has come to.
It’s almost copypastegate with the iPhone / Windows Phone all over again.
By bobbed on 11.26.12 4:04pm
Tell that to Google…
By laeufer983 on 11.26.12 4:14pm
Nice try, even minor revisions of Android don’t get new names.
2.0 and 2.1, both were Eclair.
3.0, 3.1 and 3.2, all were Honeycomb.
4.1 and 4.2 both are Jelly Bean.
By bilalakhtar on 11.26.12 4:16pm
Oh…and wasn’t 2.3 Gingerbread?
By chrissands on 11.26.12 4:29pm
And 2.2 was Froyo. If anything, all this saying is that the correlation between revision number and code names is arbitrary.
By Braden Roy on 11.26.12 4:37pm
It does seem arbitrary, but I think it’s more to do with the fact they both point at different things.
X.y is based on code bases:
2.y was based on the same android phone core software
3.y was based on the same tablet core software
4.y was based on the new ‘merged’ phone and tablet software.
The various y revision updates are incremental updates based upon that core X base, and whether the revision gets a new name is, I believe, the arbitrary component, based on whether Google thinks it deserves it. (2.3 > 3.0 or 3.2 > 4.0 I consider included in this section.)
By spudtheimpaler on 11.27.12 6:54am
Yeah, that’s what I was trying to imply. The naming convention doesn’t have to do with the specific revision number as much as it has to do with how Google aims to present it.
It the new revision primarily bug fixes? It probably will inherit the previous code name. Does it change the user experience in a visible way and/or add new features? It will probably get a code name all its own.
By Braden Roy on 11.27.12 4:11pm
To be honest, 2.2 → 2.3 was a big change (gestures, SIP support, new Google apps, aesthetic changes, better copy/paste, etc)
By bilalakhtar on 11.26.12 5:56pm
4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich
4.1 Jelly Bean
By EA575 on 11.26.12 4:31pm
4.0 → 4.1 was WAY more than a big fix release.
By bilalakhtar on 11.26.12 5:56pm
2.2 FroYo
2.3 Gingerbread
By EA575 on 11.26.12 5:57pm
Oh, I see you’ve already answered this.
By EA575 on 11.26.12 5:58pm
It was small enough to be considered a 0.1 release wasn’t it?
By simbadogg on 11.26.12 7:23pm
So that .1 increment is NOT a minor revision now?
By Wizerud on 11.27.12 12:43am
It’s certainly minor, but bug fixing gets .0.1 increments in Android.
Android 4.1.1 isn’t called “Jelly Bean+” or Android 4.1.2 “Jelly Bean++”, likewise Android 4.0.4 isn’t called “Jelly Bean++++”.
By augustofretes on 11.27.12 4:17am
Looking at your comments, I think it’s apparent you’re not used to the common usage of Minor and Major release. You’re looking at the features and thinking this was a major new thing, therfore give it a new name, this was minor, therefore don’t. Major and Minor releases in the software world are a convention. We call anything where the primary number increments as a Major release (e.g. 3.4 → 4.0 is a Major release) and anything where the secondary number increases as a Minor release (e.g. 3.4 → 3.6).
It’s standard terminology which it looks like you haven’t come across before, which is probably why it seems to you that people are being overly critical of what you say. To us, when you say “4.0 → 4.1” is a major release, you’re being, by definition, incorrect.
By h4rm0ny on 11.27.12 4:25am
What about Mac OS X? It had significant upgrades over the years, yet the version number only increased 0.1 each year.
I think all it shows is that the way version numbers change is very much dependent on whatever the project is. (Linux is also very different)
By topbanana on 11.27.12 5:49am