Talk:List of Windows 10 Mobile devices

Classification issues
Sorting by CPU cores is a really bad idea. The Core i5-750S is a quad core processor, and the i5-6260U is a dual core processor. Guess which one is faster. Sorting by cpu core count would be especially bad in the future. Best way to deal with this is to organize by year of production, since phones usually are split into "generations" that way, but sorting by device type is a start. Teemome (talk) 13:58, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Of late there have been too many edits with respect to classification of the devices. The old model of 'cores,resolution' is clearly obsolete as devices today come with fixed number of cores/clock speed ratio. As a result mentioning the processor type with a link to it's official documentation is sufficient. Also the classification at the time of writing i.e "Phones, phablets and tablets" looks quite odd and may not be readable once the number of phones increase. I suggest two ways of classifying the devices.

1. Based on processor type : This can be the strongest classification as the number of devices per processor type is in a manageable range.

2. Based on resolution: The number of different resolutions is small and can help in classifying the devices.

I strongly suggest the first one i.e based on processor type. It helps differentiate between higher and lower ends clearly and also between generations as new phones come with newer processor types. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.151.251.74 (talk) 10:40, 6 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Sorting by processor isn't a good idea, the processor in a phone only barely correlates with the high/low end scale. Making a sorting scale based off of high/low end phones is probably a good idea, but using processor type is a bad distinguisher.


 * Resolution is horrible idea, since if you look at the current tablets, 1024 x 768 is less than a lot of the 5 inch phones. Putting a 8 inch tablet below the budget 5 inch models doesn't make sense, they're clearly different categories. Sorting this page in such a way where these two devices are put together is... a bad idea, to say the least.Teemome (talk) 20:27, 12 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Well, you where also the guy that decided that putting it all in one table would be a solution... Honestly, this classification system has worked for the past generations of Windows Phone and is consistent with these pages, why would we suddenly change now? The tables you made where just pasted after each other with not a single logical order. And just as with putting everything in 1 table, putting everything in 3 tables would end up with a real mess by this time next year. I've undone it, unless you have a REAL solution to this "problem" (because really, what's the problem here again?), it should stay as it has always been: nice. --YannickFran (talk) 18:16, 17 March 2016 (UTC)


 * The new layout looks nice imo and is much easier to search through. Much easier to see the difference between tablets and phones, rather than hiding tablets in the middle of the mess of CPUs.
 * Honestly, I like big tables. I don't see what the problem with them is... There's a lot of data to be put on the page, so why not make it available? If I want to sort by CPU cores or RAM, I can. If I want to sort by screen size, I can.
 * The old design is really bad in comparison. There's a grand total of 1 phone each in the Octa-core 720p table, the Quad-core 800p table, the Hexa-core 1080p table, the Quad-core 1440p table, the Hexa-core 1440p table, and the Octa-core 1440p table. Do you really think that a half dozen tables with 1 entry looks better than a sortable table?
 * The "new" look is flawed in many ways, and I've already listed them. First of all, these tables just put devices in random order. Second, this is going to become a mess by this time next year when many other devices have joined this list. Third; this is inconsistent to other pages. Fourth: it doesn't matter that some categories have only 1 or 2 entries right now, as part of point 2: this will change in the future.
 * And fifth; lovely how you call my edit a "hasty revert without discussion" while you are the one to do a hasty revert without discussion. If you revert an edit, read the edit summary first, than you would have seen that I've already asked TWICE to discuss these changes before they are made.
 * So here we go, I restore the article back to its last good state with all the updated data that followed after that, and first discuss these kind of changes before you go mindlessly hitting that revert-button again.--YannickFran (talk) 15:21, 18 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Saying "Second, this is going to become a mess" violates WP:CRYSTALBALL and is prohibited. Again, Wikipedia is for referring to what exists, not what is predicted to exist. Quotes like ". Fourth: it doesn't matter that some categories have only 1 or 2 entries right now, as part of point 2: this will change in the future." actively violates Wikipedia policy.
 * There are no other pages to be inconsistent with. Windows 10 Mobile is a different brand compared to Windows Phone. Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Windows_Phone_devices and notice that Windows 10 Mobile is not grouped with the Windows Phone pages. It's in the "See Also" section, along with this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Windows_Mobile_devices  ... Notice that the List of Windows Mobile devices page doesn't sort by CPU, so neither should the Windows 10 Mobile page.
 * Teemome (talk) 11:53, 22 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Since you complained about a lack of order so much, I sorted the table into alphabetical order. Just for you. <3
 * I'd also like to point out that there exists little arrow buttons on the top row that you can click on. They automagically sort the table for you! And you can click on different ones to sort the table by different properties, in ascending and descending order. Isn't technology cool? It's really useful, isn't it? I wonder what type of person would prefer sorting a dozen different tables with only one row per table instead? That would completely render the sorting feature useless, doesn't it? Teemome (talk) 13:16, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Processor of late is the best indicator of a high end phone and generation. For e.g an SD 820 processor indicates a phone is a high end one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.75.75.86 (talk) 11:49, 16 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Newer latest processor doesn't mean better, though. Would you rather have last year's Intel i7 in your computer or this year's Intel Celeron? 136.152.209.59 (talk) 14:00, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

It doesn't mean better but it helps in classifying. Separate the generations first and then under each generation, classify as per processor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.151.251.74 (talk) 12:29, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Devices with custom ROMs
I have removed Xiaomi Mi4 from the list as it is an android device. There is another device Umi DIGI which also ships with a windows 10 ROM. The number is expected to grow and they can't be put together with the rest of the phones. Back in the WP7 era, there were a few devices like HTC HD2 which also supported the OS via custom ROM. It's listing was removed.

If these devices should be added, please make a separate classification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.151.251.74 (talk) 13:33, 20 March 2016 (UTC)


 * why remove Xiaomi Mi4? Xiaomi Mi4 is microsoft offical supported device. example Announcing Windows 10 Mobile Insider Preview Build 14283 Osakanataro (talk) 01:34, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Relevant discussion about the design of this page
https://www.reddit.com/r/windows/comments/47j0pf/microsoft_to_release_windows_10_mobile_for/d0duuzb?context=10

As an aside note: no, I am not one of the commenters on that thread. However, the voting patterns of the commentary for this page speaks for itself. Teemome (talk) 12:01, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with "antena", the design of this page is ridiculous. "By jove Lora, I can't seem to remember whether the phone we saw at the store runs Windows 10 or not?" "Of course, Philip, tell me how many cores the phone has and the display fidelity and I'll look it up!". jcc (tea and biscuits) 20:14, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Since most people here (user accounts and pretty much all the IP users) don't like the current design, and nobody has objected in the past few days, I'm going to edit the page now. If anyone else gets pissy and tries to revert it... I'll tell them that the internet thinks that they're an idiot. The beautiful part of my previous sentence is that I'm not stating an opinion, I'm stating a (referenced!) fact, that said user is considered an idiot. The comment isn't even controversial, Reddit would mark it with a red cross if it was. Of the sample from the population of "people who go on the windows subreddit", more people upvoted the post saying that the design for this page sucks than the number of people who upvoted the comment linking to the page itself. That's pretty bad. Teemome (talk) 13:00, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Should the Windows 10 Mobile phone by Keyever be added?
This device hasn't been released yet and the company hasn't released all the specs.

http://www.gsmarena.com/a_35_bar_phone_with_windows_10_and_a_physical_keyboard_from_chinas_keyever_-news-17982.php

Daylen (talk) 23:59, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on List of Windows 10 Mobile devices. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160304062853/http://www.alcatelonetouch.com/global-en/products/detail?model=PIXI%203%20(8)%204G%20Windows to http://www.alcatelonetouch.com/global-en/products/detail?model=PIXI%203%20(8)%204G%20Windows#.VpN5PzjUjwo

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 19:16, 8 June 2016 (UTC)