Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 17:05 UTC
Windows Two links to Marco Arment within a few days? Well, if you make good points: "Many Windows developers were upset that iOS development had to be done on a Mac, but it didn't hurt Apple: the most important developers for iOS apps were already using Macs. But the success of Windows 8 and Windows Phone in the consumer space requires many of those consumer-product developers, now entrenched in the Apple ecosystem, to care so much about Windows development that they want to use Windows to develop for it. How likely is that?" As usual a bit too Apple-centric (he implies - as explicit as possible while still being implicit - that only iOS developers can create great applications), but his point still stands. Judging by the abysmal quality of Microsoft's own Metro applications (Mail, Video, Music, People, IE10, etc.), even Microsoft doesn't know how to create great Metro applications.
Order by: Score:
Comment by sagum
by sagum on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 18:10 UTC
sagum
Member since:
2006-01-23

"Judging by the abysmal quality of Microsoft's own Metro applications (Mail, Video, Music, People, IE10, etc.), even Microsoft doesn't know how to create great Metro applications"

I get slammed every time I say that, but its really one of the biggest things that irks me the most. Microsoft prancing around trying to tell us how great Metro is, yet their own apps that they ship with preview builds such as Consumer Preview, aren't anything special that would warrent people to get remotely excited.
In fact, they are terrible. They'd be a key reason NOT to want to use Windows 8, buy a Windows Phone, or even develop for their ecosystem. Their own core apps far worse then their 'classic' Windows counter parts. Upgrade to Windows 8 with metro? nah its more like a downgrade if thats the best they can come up with.

Sure Microsoft can upgrade their mail, pictures etc Metor apps for release, or even afterwards, but they've got to create apps that are better then existing programs (or even webpages!) that people are currently using. If they can't do that, its not an upgrade for users or developers.

Reply Score: 15

RE: Comment by sagum
by fatjoe on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 18:31 UTC in reply to "Comment by sagum"
fatjoe Member since:
2010-01-12

First of all, why are everyone making judgement on unfinished and early preview apps?

Secondly, these apps are SIMPLIFIED. They are meant to be easy to use even for people with no computer experience. This is new direction for Microsoft that we should applaud not ridicule.

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/03/windows-8-mai...

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by sagum
by reduz on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 18:57 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by sagum"
reduz Member since:
2006-02-25

I'm sorry but the "more accessible because it's simpler" argument doesn't work. People mainly learns when there is a need for it, and accessibility comes second as a plus.
Facebook is a prime example of of accessibility vs need and Apple does a great job in promoting their products as needed to belong to a social status.

But for Microsoft and Windows 8, the argument is pretty much.. what is the need for it? what does it change? why should people care?

Reply Score: 9

RE[3]: Comment by sagum
by Nelson on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 19:46 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by sagum"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I'm sorry, but the reality is that consumers hardly get to make the choice. If technology truly sold on satisfaction alone then there's no way in hell that Android would dominate.

The pitch has always been to OEMs. DESPITE Microsoft launching their own Surface tablet, Windows 8 still represents an OEMs best bet to take on the iPad.

Android has failed OEMs spectacularly. Performance isn't there, patents are a legal minefield, app quality isn't there, the platform is wholly unsuited for tablets. Even on ICS many objective people can still concede it is largely unready.

In contrast, Windows 8 offers stability. It is THE only OS seen as a viable competitor to iOS in the tablet space.

Android won the battle of entrenchment in the Mobile Phone space, but in Tablets it hasn't happened yet. This is where Microsoft will capitalize. Windows 8 will see a spectacular success.

Why will Windows 8 be such a success? It breaks the chicken and egg scenario, and its quite genius.

Developers wont develop for a platform without users, users wont flock to a platform without developers.

Microsoft will put Windows 8 on PCs too, giving them an immense install base (Hundreds of millions), which will entice ANY SANE DEVELOPER.

This is why Windows 8 can, and largely will work for Microsoft. OEMs are enthusiastic about it, just look at Computex. Dozens of devices announced.

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: Comment by sagum
by reduz on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 21:45 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by sagum"
reduz Member since:
2006-02-25

I'm sorry, but you are wrong about everything.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Comment by sagum
by Nelson on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 22:04 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by sagum"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

There is no alternative to Windows for OEMs looking for the "anti-apple".

Windows 8 absolutely dominated Computex. When the hell did they mention Android? I seriously heard of like two devices announced. It is beyond clear the OEMs are looking to get the fuck off of Android as soon as they can. Some PC OEMs have completely abandoned it, others can't wait to do so.

It by and large is not a question of "What does Windows 8 bring to the table?" (The answer being a no compromise solution across the PC, Tablet, and Phone), since strong OEM support is a certainty.

If I'm wrong on anything I've said I certainly would love to hear why.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Comment by sagum
by JAlexoid on Sun 24th Jun 2012 03:01 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by sagum"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

FYI: This year's Android tablets have been already announced at CES and MWC.

It is beyond clear the OEMs are looking to get the fuck off of Android as soon as they can.

You are getting this from Computex?

Some PC OEMs have completely abandoned it, others can't wait to do so.

You obviously mean Dell, that abandoned WP7 as well. They did abandon the phone and tablet market altogether.

Reply Score: 4

RE[7]: Comment by sagum
by Nelson on Sun 24th Jun 2012 03:16 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by sagum"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

FYI: This year's Android tablets have been already announced at CES and MWC.


Which number in the single digits, after you factor out the references, concepts, and obvious vaporware.

Besides ASUS, Samsung, and maybe Toshiba no one is really having any luck or even showing enthusiasm.


You are getting this from Computex?


Yes, CES and Computex together showed a vast array of Windows 8 devices.


You obviously mean Dell, that abandoned WP7 as well. They did abandon the phone and tablet market altogether.


Yes, the same Dell which is incredibly bullish on Windows 8 and sees it as their come back kid.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by sagum
by Fergy on Sun 24th Jun 2012 06:28 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by sagum"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

If I'm wrong on anything I've said I certainly would love to hear why.

First you are biased towards Microsoft. Second you are biased against Android.

Android is so popular because it is a good and free mobile OS. The patent problems are a temporary problem from competitors that can't compete. This popularity brings apps to phones and tablets.

Microsoft used to have all the apps with win32 on x86. Now they start on the same playing field as Apple and Android. WP7.5 has not taken off like they wanted. Why would you choose W8 over iPad and Android?

Reply Score: 8

RE[7]: Comment by sagum
by Nelson on Sun 24th Jun 2012 07:37 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by sagum"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29


First you are biased towards Microsoft. Second you are biased against Android.


I could say the exact opposite about you, or anyone else I'd argue against. Doesn't make it true. People can have preference without letting it cloud judgement.

I have no problem criticizing Microsoft when they do indefensibly stupid things, but this entire article is a concern troll.


Android is so popular because it is a good and free mobile OS.


That's quite the fairy tale. Android is popular because Verizon and the rest of the world needed an anti-iPhone. Windows Mobile was floundering, there was nothing to step up to the plate.

Google's Android represented the perfect storm. Complete and utter carrier and OEM capitulation. They had free reign to do anything they wanted. They could modify it until it slowed even the most expensive quad core monsters, or they could shove it on 500MHz crap devices with 2 inch screens.


The patent problems are a temporary problem from competitors that can't compete. This popularity brings apps to phones and tablets.


The patent problem is a big problem, one that threatens the existence of Android. Microsoft is set to make a BILLION (with a b) dollars off of Android this year alone. You think OEMs like paying royalties? Fuck, for that they'd just license Windows since the advantage of "free" Android is negated by licensing costs.


Microsoft used to have all the apps with win32 on x86. Now they start on the same playing field as Apple and Android. WP7.5 has not taken off like they wanted. Why would you choose W8 over iPad and Android?


There's one too many players here. The new question is Windows 8 vs iPad. Android completely failed on Tablets. Its no longer in the picture. OEMs are moving on.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by sagum
by Nelson on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 22:11 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by sagum"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Nevermind, judging by your comments in another thread you're just an irrational fanatic. Makes sense now.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Comment by sagum
by reduz on Sun 24th Jun 2012 21:14 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by sagum"
reduz Member since:
2006-02-25

It puzzles me in this day and age that Microsoft fanboys still exist..
The last time i saw someone being a fan of Microsoft was like.. 1996?

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by sagum
by westlake on Sun 24th Jun 2012 23:17 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by sagum"
westlake Member since:
2010-01-07

It puzzles me in this day and age that Microsoft fanboys still exist..


It would be mean to suggest that the fanboy is --- by definition --- eternally adolescent.

That he refuses to see what he does not want to see: in this case, that Windows remains the OS of choice for a breathtaking number of users:

From Statcounter:

Mobile v Desktop Global:

http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_vs_desktop-ww-monthly-201105-2012...

Even in gadget-obsessed Japan the desktop still dominates:

http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_vs_desktop-JP-monthly-201105-2012...

Operating System Global:

http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-201105-201205-bar

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by sagum
by JAlexoid on Sun 24th Jun 2012 02:49 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by sagum"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

In contrast, Windows 8 offers stability. It is THE only OS seen as a viable competitor to iOS in the tablet space.

So was Honeycomb when it was demoed. So far it's another competitor, with a newer interpretation of UX/UI. No single tablet has succeeded when taking on iPad head to head, same goes for iPhone.

This is where Microsoft will capitalize. Windows 8 will see a spectacular success.

Can capitalize on the failures of iPad competition and can see success on tablets. Execution, execution, execution.

Why will Windows 8 be such a success? It breaks the chicken and egg scenario, and its quite genius.

It forces a new UX on existing developers on PC and offers no audience for the tablet.(2 indisputable facts) Millions in install base is an enticing proposition, but question will be one of UX quality. On the number of apps part Windows8 will be covered quite well and you probably know that it's not only the number of apps.


This is why Windows 8 can, and largely will work for Microsoft. OEMs are enthusiastic about it, just look at Computex. Dozens of devices announced.

On tablet front: that was prior to Surface. On PC OS front: There is no other option for PC manufacturers.
The second part will help Windows8 in regards to the quantity of apps, but we have evidence that success in one market does not necessarily translate to success in another.
There is only 1 problem - Windows 8 is going against iPad. It has to bring viable disruption to the market. As good as Surface looks, it's not really that obviously great. The new iPad, however, is.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by sagum
by Nelson on Sun 24th Jun 2012 03:27 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by sagum"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29


So was Honeycomb when it was demoed. So far it's another competitor, with a newer interpretation of UX/UI. No single tablet has succeeded when taking on iPad head to head, same goes for iPhone.


Honeycomb was really an embarrassment of a release. I think even reviews at the time acknowledged it didn't have what it took.

And guess what, not much has changed with ICS.


Can capitalize on the failures of iPad competition and can see success on tablets. Execution, execution, execution.


Microsoft wins by default, pretty soon like I said only a few OEMs will be even playing ball with Android tabs.

Especially more PC oriented OEMs who already have their bread and butter with Windows.


It forces a new UX on existing developers on PC and offers no audience for the tablet.(2 indisputable facts) Millions in install base is an enticing proposition, but question will be one of UX quality.


I honestly am of the opinion that a lot of the complaints are strict power user complaints which have no bearing with consumers.

Microsoft has gone into incredible detail in their blogs about the interaction studies they did while designing Windows 8. Funny how no one takes on those issues head on, but sticks to the same, tired "Its a bad UX" meme.


On the number of apps part Windows8 will be covered quite well and you probably know that it's not only the number of apps.


Metro makes it really easy to make high quality looking application. Its probably easier than on any other platform. Including iOS, including Android, including Windows Phone.

The story is a lot more complete. Its easier to use pre-canned animations, the performance of apps is dramatically better, Live tiles are precanned templates, etc.

A lot of the pain points WP7 dev had has been addressed marvelously.

Plus, and I think this is overlooked, this will be the FIRST Tablet since the iPad to have the Gaming chops to take on the iPad.

Android gaming is really a joke, but with Windows 8 the Game studios use the _very_ familiar DirectX APIs and can reuse existing tooling for Metro Style gaming.

I expect gaming on Windows 8 to be huge. Especially once devs get to play with the Xbox 360 Smart Glass APIs.


On tablet front: that was prior to Surface.


Surface changes nothing. OEMs are not going to drop Windows 8 because of it. They have no where else to go. Go back to Android? Yeah, like that's been working so well for them (rolls eyes).


On PC OS front: There is no other option for PC manufacturers.


A lot of the PC OS manufacturers are also going to be making tablets. Acer, HP, Dell, Asus, hell, even Samsung.


The second part will help Windows8 in regards to the quantity of apps, but we have evidence that success in one market does not necessarily translate to success in another.


I think it will carry over well, because apps written for WinRT run across both the PC and the tablet. So the ecosystem is bootstrapped. That's often a very significant inhibitor of progress.

Sure, part of it will be marketing and working the sales channel (Which PC OEMs are masterful at, mind you), but a large part of it is a healthy and growing ecosystem.

Windows 8 has the potential to have an addressable market in the hundreds of millions in just a year. Any developer who doesn't immediately hop on that train is wasting money.

This dwarfs Androids, dwards iOS. Microsoft sold 180 million copies of Windows Vista, and people hated that shit.

By virtue of being Windows, the ecosystem is almost guaranteed.


There is only 1 problem - Windows 8 is going against iPad. It has to bring viable disruption to the market. As good as Surface looks, it's not really that obviously great. The new iPad, however, is.


I'm on the fence about Surface, that will take real execution. I think Windows 8 as a whole. Surface, and all OEMs included can take a healthy chunk of the market.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by sagum
by remenic on Sun 24th Jun 2012 05:42 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by sagum"
remenic Member since:
2005-07-06

The #1 reason for Direct X support on WP8: Microsoft's huge library of old XBox games, that would make a great addition to their game collection. In fact, their only killer feature. They'd be fools if they didn't port at least their most popular titles.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by sagum
by Fergy on Sun 24th Jun 2012 06:30 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by sagum"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

The #1 reason for Direct X support on WP8: Microsoft's huge library of old XBox games, that would make a great addition to their game collection. In fact, their only killer feature. They'd be fools if they didn't port at least their most popular titles.

AFAIK Xbox doesn't use either windows or directx.

Reply Score: 0

RE[6]: Comment by sagum
by JAlexoid on Sun 24th Jun 2012 12:16 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by sagum"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Microsoft wins by default, pretty soon like I said only a few OEMs will be even playing ball with Android tabs.

Especially more PC oriented OEMs who already have their bread and butter with Windows.

Well... Acer has broke the silence of the OEMs and it's not good for Microsoft. http://venturebeat.com/2012/06/23/acer-microsoft-criticism/

I honestly am of the opinion that a lot of the complaints are strict power user complaints which have no bearing with consumers.

I'm not saying that the first party UX is bad, I'm saying that that UX is still alien to most developers.

Android gaming is really a joke, but with Windows 8 the Game studios use the _very_ familiar DirectX APIs and can reuse existing tooling for Metro Style gaming.

My buddies at Unity Technologies say different. Direct3D is no critical feature.

Surface changes nothing. OEMs are not going to drop Windows 8 because of it.

For tablets, they might just drop it. Surface is no less sour than Google's Motorola acquisition.

I'm on the fence about Surface, that will take real execution. I think Windows 8 as a whole. Surface, and all OEMs included can take a healthy chunk of the market.

As I mentioned, there has to be the "in your face" disruptive feature. I yet to see it in Windows8, or in Surface.

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by sagum
by Flatland_Spider on Sun 24th Jun 2012 20:20 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by sagum"
Flatland_Spider Member since:
2006-09-01

"Microsoft wins by default, pretty soon like I said only a few OEMs will be even playing ball with Android tabs.

Especially more PC oriented OEMs who already have their bread and butter with Windows.


Well... Acer has broke the silence of the OEMs and it's not good for Microsoft. http://venturebeat.com/2012/06/23/acer-microsoft-criticism/
"

From the article :"Instead, Ahrens would like to see Microsoft focus on the Windows 8 user experience and leave the hardware creation to its hardware partners."

The Windows OEMs create crappy hardware experiences, including Acer. Ahrens is just mad that MS is now producing a reference model that people will judge their hardware against. Their cheap, cut all corners hardware and stuffed to the gills with crapware software load is going to look pretty bad against the cherry picked stuff from MS.

As I mentioned, there has to be the "in your face" disruptive feature. I yet to see it in Windows8, or in Surface.


You're thinking consumer, and that's not who is going to buy this initially.

The disruptive feature is a full fledged Windows OS with printing, Active Directory integration, and Windows apps. This is answering the need of businesses that need a tablet that is more PC then phone.

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by sagum
by Nelson on Sun 24th Jun 2012 23:43 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by sagum"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29


Well... Acer has broke the silence of the OEMs and it's not good for Microsoft. http://venturebeat.com/2012/06/23/acer-microsoft-criticism/


They also mention they intend to STAY with Windows 8. Logically, they have no choice.


I'm not saying that the first party UX is bad, I'm saying that that UX is still alien to most developers.


I actually agree here, but Microsoft has the muscle to do intense training. They have developer code camps all over the country, and offer more dev support than any other company I can think of.

Also, it is especially hard to deviate from the standard UX of Windows 8 when writing an app. You have to actively go out of your way to violate principals on WinRT.

It was tons easier to make something look bad on Silverlight for Windows Phone.


My buddies at Unity Technologies say different. Direct3D is no critical feature.


Unity is peanuts in the gaming world. Sure, it's big on mobile because iOS doesn't have DirectX and they _need_ something there.

On Windows, there is Unreal, Havok, Source, CryEngine, etc. All of those toolchains use DirectX.

There is tons of developer knowledge on DirectX. It heavily outweighs OpenGL.

OpenGL lost this war about half of a decade ago. It recently found success on mobile because Microsoft floundered.


For tablets, they might just drop it. Surface is no less sour than Google's Motorola acquisition.


What are they going to do? Go to Android who hasn't performed well and is made by Google? (Who also has Motorola) Roll their own? No, and no.

Tablet OEMs are going to stay the course on Windows 8.


As I mentioned, there has to be the "in your face" disruptive feature. I yet to see it in Windows8, or in Surface.


The killer feature is the keyboard, the ability to run Windows apps, the enterprise support (This is highly instrumental, this with Windows Phone 8 is going to eat Blackberry's Lunch), the familiar UI across 360, Phone, Tablet, PC . Etc.)

Apple's approach to unifying their platforms I think is much more pigheaded.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by sagum
by Fergy on Sun 24th Jun 2012 06:32 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by sagum"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

So far it's another competitor, with a newer interpretation of UX/UI. No single tablet has succeeded when taking on iPad head to head, same goes for iPhone.

Are you saying that nothing comes close to an iPhone?

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by sagum
by JAlexoid on Sun 24th Jun 2012 12:13 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by sagum"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Are you saying that nothing comes close to an iPhone?

In it's category? Nothing.

Reply Score: 0

RE[7]: Comment by sagum
by Fergy on Sun 24th Jun 2012 16:01 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by sagum"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

"Are you saying that nothing comes close to an iPhone?

In it's category? Nothing.
"
All those people that chose anything else but Iphone are dumb? I don't care that you call me dumb for paying 600 euro for an Android phone but I am interested how far you are willing to go with your opinion.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by sagum
by Lorin on Sun 24th Jun 2012 07:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by sagum"
Lorin Member since:
2010-04-06

Can you spell "Shill"? Come on, we all know better and the numbers just simply don't agree with you. Android, is by far the #1 selling platform with IOS behind. Samsung and HTC numbers 1 and 2 in the market.

I work in China which is a good indicator of what is happening in the market, I now see more Samsung devices in public than I do Apple, and have yet to see a single Microsoft powered device.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by sagum
by Nelson on Sun 24th Jun 2012 09:07 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by sagum"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Can you spell "Shill"? Come on, we all know better and the numbers just simply don't agree with you. Android, is by far the #1 selling platform with IOS behind. Samsung and HTC numbers 1 and 2 in the market.

I work in China which is a good indicator of what is happening in the market, I now see more Samsung devices in public than I do Apple, and have yet to see a single Microsoft powered device.


Did you read anything that I said, at all? If you did, read it again. Pay attention this time.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Comment by sagum
by cdude on Mon 25th Jun 2012 16:10 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by sagum"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Please read yourself about last quarter numbers. In Q1 2012 Android became market-leader.

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-04-27/tech/31419233_1_mark...

Reply Score: 0

RE[4]: Comment by sagum
by Valhalla on Sun 24th Jun 2012 11:42 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by sagum"
Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

Sounds just like when you told us Silverlight was the future!

You make Florian Muller come across as objective...

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Comment by sagum
by lucas_maximus on Sun 24th Jun 2012 12:58 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by sagum"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

XAML and C#, it still is pretty much silverlight.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by sagum
by JAlexoid on Mon 25th Jun 2012 19:43 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by sagum"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

In your words - Oh, whatever!

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Comment by sagum
by lucas_maximus on Tue 26th Jun 2012 12:33 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by sagum"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Pretty much the same technology, therefore the same techniques ... but whatever.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by sagum
by Nelson on Sun 24th Jun 2012 23:46 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by sagum"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I used Silverlight for lack of a better word at the time. But XAML is the future.

XAML is on the Xbox 360, the PC, the tablet, and the Phone space.

How exactly was I wrong again?

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by sagum
by Valhalla on Mon 25th Jun 2012 13:20 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by sagum"
Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

I used Silverlight for lack of a better word at the time. But XAML is the future.


First off, stop moving the goalpost, Silverlight is dead, now you try to paint it as 'oh, but in reality I meant the technology on which Silverlight was built upon'
It's like saying 'yeah, this new code/framework we said was going to rule the world failed, but you know, it was written in c/posix, and c/posix is still readily available so it's not as we failed!

And XAML being the future? I doubt it's even the future for Windows as with Metro we have HTML5/JS as the first class citizen for Metro apps.

And as for C#, not even Microsoft tries to pretend it's the software panacea anymore as proven by their 'going native' push for Visual Studio 2012. Just like WinRT is native, you know that runtime which HTML5 and NET wraps around to provide performant functionality.

Of the three options available for Metro developers I think HTML5 for simple stuff and native C++ for where they need to push the hardware (as in higher end games) is going to dominate, not XAML/NET. But this is all just speculation at this point, time will tell.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by sagum
by lucas_maximus on Mon 25th Jun 2012 15:09 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by sagum"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18


It's like saying 'yeah, this new code/framework we said was going to rule the world failed, but you know, it was written in c/posix, and c/posix is still readily available so it's not as we failed!


All the technologies and techniques are pretty much the same between Metro and Silverlight. Windows Phone 7 even uses Silverlight.

It isn't nearly as generic as the example you gave.

Silverlight = XAML + VB/C# .NET

Metro = XAML + VB/C# .NET || HTML + JS.

:|

And XAML being the future? I doubt it's even the future for Windows as with Metro we have HTML5/JS as the first class citizen for Metro apps.


That is debatable. I rather take a strongly typed language over HTML 5 and JS anyday.

And as for C#, not even Microsoft tries to pretend it's the software panacea anymore as proven by their 'going native' push for Visual Studio 2012. Just like WinRT is native, you know that runtime which HTML5 and NET wraps around to provide performant functionality.


Unfortunately we are coming up against Atwoods law.

Of the three options available for Metro developers I think HTML5 for simple stuff and native C++ for where they need to push the hardware (as in higher end games) is going to dominate, not XAML/NET. But this is all just speculation at this point, time will tell.


C++ in Metro is still going to be managed C++, which is very .NET-ish and it uses XAML. There really isn't that much difference.

Edited 2012-06-25 15:13 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by sagum
by Nelson on Wed 27th Jun 2012 06:48 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by sagum"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29


It's like saying 'yeah, this new code/framework we said was going to rule the world failed, but you know, it was written in c/posix, and c/posix is still readily available so it's not as we failed!


Oh come on, you're playing semantics. The XAML vocabulary shared between WPF, Silverlight, and WinRT is the same.

The databinding mechanisms are the same (Dependency Properties, INPC interface, Value Converters etc.)

Attached properties, Behaviors, hell, even the API namespaces are largely the same.

The standard controls are the same. There's StackPanels and Grids and WrapPanels. There's still UI virtualization.

There are differences along the margins, but its expected in the evolution of a technology. Does Microsoft have an extreme naming and messaging problem? Yes.

Does that make these technologies fundamentally different? No.


And XAML being the future? I doubt it's even the future for Windows as with Metro we have HTML5/JS as the first class citizen for Metro apps.


HTML5/JS is really relegated to second class citizen status, if you actually know what you're talking about (read: actually develop for Windows 8, like I do).

In HTML5/JS you can't author WinRT components, only consume. You can't interop with DirectX natively without expensive GPU readback. You get a subset of WinRT and its type model.

That, and there's still no comparison between .NET BCL and what JS offers (next to nothing).

There's no one king of the hill in Windows 8. C++ and C# are slightly on elevated footing because of what I mention above, but HTML5/JS is still compelling for people who like that.


And as for C#, not even Microsoft tries to pretend it's the software panacea anymore as proven by their 'going native' push for Visual Studio 2012. Just like WinRT is native, you know that runtime which HTML5 and NET wraps around to provide performant functionality.


You might've been able to get away with this with lucas_maximus because he got a little confused, but you won't get away with it with me.

First off, various WinRT components (even public API endpoints in Windows 8) are a mixture of C++ and C#. Some are C++ and some are C#.

The WinRT underpinnings learned a lot from .NET, and borrows a lot from it. The type system is modeled after .NET, the metadata _IS_ .NET metadata. You can view it in ildasm.

The entire design of the WinRT API is .NET, the enabling of generic types is .NET, basically WinRT could not have happened without the innovations in the BCL and C#.

Where WinRT was needed was to provide a better interop story. That's something COM (which WinRT is a modified incarnation of) is excellent at. The difference is that its coupled with language projections.

Javascript doesn't talk to WinRT directly, its wrapped by the WebHost engine. C# doesn't talk to it directly, its wrapped using a RCW. C++/CX doesn't talk to it directly, it's a language extension and compile time wrappers using the WRL (a WinRTified ATL).

So unless you're doing raw C++ with WRL (read: nofuckingbody), you're using some form of an abstraction.

Hell, if you even bothered to do some profiling (You haven't), you'd know that the C# projection and C++/CX projections provide pretty comparable performance.

From an abstraction performance there's no difference, essentially. C++ just still wins on raw performance, but that's always been true, but it comes with its own can of worms to deal with.


Of the three options available for Metro developers I think HTML5 for simple stuff


HTML5 even for "simple apps" is tedious. There's a reason why all HTML5/JS apps in the Windows Store are boring walls of tiles. Because besides the pre-canned templates, no one wants to fucking deal with that mess of a combo.

Any language of medium to high complexity is C++/XAML or C#/XAML.

Plus, you can look at it by forum popularity. The C# forum on dev.windows.com is the most popular by leaps and bounds. It's obvious the .NET collective is pumping out Windows 8 apps.


and native C++ for where they need to push the hardware (as in higher end games) is going to dominate, not XAML/NET. But this is all just speculation at this point, time will tell.


Actually, time has already told. If you do some inspection of Windows Store apps, you can see that its not so cut and dry.

A lot of DirectX apps use C++ DirectX for the rendering and scene graph with C#/XAML for the logic/interface.

C# is just easier to manage, and with WinRT the interop between native and managed is much faster. It becomes feasible.

I wish you'd do a lot less talking out of your ass and more actual research.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by sagum
by thavith_osn on Sun 24th Jun 2012 23:18 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by sagum"
thavith_osn Member since:
2005-07-11

I actually think you have made a very valid point, and one that I and I'm sure a lot of others have missed.

Apps will appear for the Phone because apps will be written for Metro on W8/9/10/n, it's just going to happen.

Whether or not W8 is a huge success (see Vista) is not the point, W9 or W10 will do well (see W7). MS for all their faults do understand that you just need to stay the course, even if your product is not so good right now.

MS need to stay in this market, so even if Surface fails, there will be a Surface 2 or 3.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by sagum
by ze_jerkface on Mon 25th Jun 2012 05:51 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by sagum"
ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

Android has failed OEMs spectacularly.


Eh I guess you are talking about tablets, so are you including Kindle and Nook?


Why will Windows 8 be such a success? It breaks the chicken and egg scenario, and its quite genius.


Microsoft will put Windows 8 on PCs too, giving them an immense install base (Hundreds of millions), which will entice ANY SANE DEVELOPER.


Windows 8 will be a subset of the Windows install base and ANY SANE DEVELOPER will take that into account.

OEMs are enthusiastic about it, just look at Computex. Dozens of devices announced.


Nothing says thrilled like "We're making our own tablet".

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Comment by sagum
by Nelson on Mon 25th Jun 2012 11:05 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by sagum"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29


Eh I guess you are talking about tablets, so are you including Kindle and Nook?


No, I'm not. They're ecosystems in their own right (The Kindle Fire at least, don't know enough about the Nook to comment.)


Windows 8 will be a subset of the Windows install base and ANY SANE DEVELOPER will take that into account.


The install base will still be over 100 million. In one year. Hell, Windows Vista in one week sold more copies than there were OSX users on the planet. And people hated Vista.


Nothing says thrilled like "We're making our own tablet".


Again, I think its a lot of concern trolling. OEMs logically have no other choice but Windows 8. Unless you'd like to point some out?

They can...keep doing Android (Let me know how that works for them) or ... ? Nothing. Windows 8 is the only choice.

Reply Score: 2

Take it as an opportunity
by B. Janssen on Sun 24th Jun 2012 08:09 UTC in reply to "Comment by sagum"
B. Janssen Member since:
2006-10-11

Seriously. Take it as an opportunity. The Apple iOS platform has good applications such as Sparrow because the native e-mail client sucks very hard.

If MS stock offerings don't satisfy, built a better one. You will have customers.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by sagum
by modmans2ndcoming on Mon 25th Jun 2012 01:42 UTC in reply to "Comment by sagum"
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

Who do you think developed most of the example apps on Win8? the core dev team? Hell no...they are far to busy doing their regular job. Interns write those apps and interns are.....LEARNING.

Reply Score: 1

Typical Apple fanboy article?
by fatjoe on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 18:23 UTC
fatjoe
Member since:
2010-01-12

I don't really see the "Problem"... Some devs with huge egos want to everyone to believe that they are crème de la crème and the centre of the new computing. That without them a platform will fail no matter how good or bad it is.

I believe that Windows 8 will be very successful with lots of great ideas and apps. Microsoft alone has enough creative great programmers and creative people to keep the platform alive if it has to.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Typical Apple fanboy article?
by darknexus on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 18:34 UTC in reply to "Typical Apple fanboy article?"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Microsoft alone has enough creative great programmers and creative people to keep the platform alive if it has to.


I'm sure they do, but it seems that often Microsoft's programmers aren't really able to exercise their creativity. Management says "make it look like this and do that" and they have to design it accordingly or lose their job. Microsoft has plenty of creative programmers, but perhaps they need more creative managers and marketers since it's not the programmers that have the final say on a product.

Reply Score: 5

fatjoe Member since:
2010-01-12

Are you kidding me? You can't categorise companies of this size as "creative" and "not creative". All companies have some great folks and some complete idiots.

With things like Metro, Kinect, Surface, Wordament, Kinectimals & on{x} Microsoft has shown that the idiots are at least not in the majority ;)

Reply Score: 2

darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Are you kidding me? You can't categorise companies of this size as "creative" and "not creative". All companies have some great folks and some complete idiots.


At what point did I say otherwise?

With things like Metro, Kinect, Surface, Wordament, Kinectimals & on{x} Microsoft has shown that the idiots are at least not in the majority ;)

I wouldn't be so sure about that where Metro is concerned. They are, after all, trying to force a touch screen paradigm on to a medium that isn't suited to it (keyboard and mouse). Which Surface are you referring to, the tablet (wow, another tablet), or the project that came before it with that name? The latter was, at least, an interesting idea. Microsoft seems, at least where their Metro division is concerned, to be in a "me too" mode lately. They've essentially copied everything about iOS except the user interface and programming APIs. Locked down, check. Optimized only for touch, check. Make it extremely simple, check. Make developers pay to develop for it, check. I think they really have room to do a lot more than this if only they were permitted to do so. In fact, it would be a really good marketing move for them if they did deviate from this formula.

Reply Score: 4

fatjoe Member since:
2010-01-12

I agree with you on the stupidity of making devs paying.
I don't agree about your other points you made but at this early stage we are all speculating. Let's let it rest and see what happens during the coming months...

Reply Score: 2

rcsteiner Member since:
2005-07-12

Kinect was developed outside of Microsoft.

Reply Score: 4

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

So was Siri, so was Android, so was iTunes, etc. Acquisitions happen.

Reply Score: 3

cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Pre Android 1.0 was not. Everything afterwards WAS developed inside google and yet even 1.6 did not succeed but it took some more iterations.

iPhone was a success long before Siri amd iPhone was developed inside of Apple when it became a success.

Any better, more matching examples?

Edited 2012-06-25 16:26 UTC

Reply Score: 0

RE: Typical Apple fanboy article?
by segedunum on Mon 25th Jun 2012 09:45 UTC in reply to "Typical Apple fanboy article?"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

I believe that Windows 8 will be very successful with lots of great ideas and apps. Microsoft alone has enough creative great programmers and creative people to keep the platform alive if it has to.

But that's all they will be doing - keeping the platform alive.

On the desktop they might succeed in persuading a handful of people to use Metro applications, but in the face of Android and especially iOS on mobile devices it is dead on arrival. There is too much inertia now and they are too late.

iOS is pretty much the number one mobile platform developers develop for and has been for many years. It's really only now that Android is catching up on the applications front and it is a platform developers feel they have to support. Windows 'Whatever' and Metro are absolutely nowhere near that point and there is a compelling argument that developers just won't tolerate a third platform, especially one that locks them into the Windows/Visual Studio treadmill for no good reason.

Reply Score: 2

ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

There is another option which is to lower porting costs by layering Android on top of .NET.

The current plan of trying to leverage their desktop market and forcing the start screen to encourage 'app' development will fail.

Windows 8 will be hated by both developers and casual users. People will keep buying iPads and shareholders will want Ballmer's head.

But what do I know, I merely work on enterprise .NET applications and haven't heard a single positive thing about Windows 8 from everyone I work with. Word on the street is that Microsoft sales reps are taking a lot of heat over the release preview.

Oh and yes I did change my name from nt_jerkface.

Reply Score: 0

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29


But what do I know


Nothing. Developers I've talked with are bullish on Windows 8, and have nothing but love for WinRT and .NET 4.5 .

At the very least it seems to suggest that there are mixed opinions, and its not as black and white as you make it seem.

Reply Score: 2

*yawn*,
by MollyC on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 18:26 UTC
MollyC
Member since:
2006-07-04

Yet another, "Microsoft should give up and close up shop" articles. The article is the very definition of FUD.

I find myself wondering, "What is the point of these articles?" Meaning, what is the purpose of writing them? Is anyone going to make any significant changes in their lives after reading it? No. I guess it's just for entertainment at the end of the day.

Reply Score: 7

RE: *yawn*,
by ephracis on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 22:37 UTC in reply to "*yawn*, "
ephracis Member since:
2007-09-23

Pageviews.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: *yawn*,
by lucas_maximus on Sun 24th Jun 2012 08:57 UTC in reply to "RE: *yawn*, "
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Yup, sad isn't it.

Reply Score: 2

RE: *yawn*,
by Soulbender on Mon 25th Jun 2012 03:25 UTC in reply to "*yawn*, "
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Come on, do you really think Windows developers can create as many awesome fart apps as the IOS developers have?
*That's* how you measure the success of your platform....

Reply Score: 3

WP7 has 100k apps with only 2% marketshare
by MollyC on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 18:35 UTC
MollyC
Member since:
2006-07-04

And those are metro apps. OK, a significant percentage are glorified RSS readers, but same goes for iOS. These Apple fanboys really need to get over themselves and their belief that "Everything is about Apple, nobody else need apply."

Edited 2012-06-23 18:36 UTC

Reply Score: 2

darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

You know, every time someone brings up app numbers, I want to smack them. App numbers mean nothing. It doesn't matter how many apps a platform has, but whether they have the apps people want or need to get things done. This goes for any platform. Enough of this "platform x has y number of apps" crap. It tells us nothing about the quality of the apps or the platform, and is only a stupid marketing tactic that demeans the intelligence of both the person saying it and those who read it.

Reply Score: 8

fatjoe Member since:
2010-01-12

Also, "good apps" are only and advantage to the platform owner if they are not available on competing platforms, and can't be ported (or cloned by someone else) with minor efforts.

Even if Instapaper was _the killer app_ for iOS, would it be impossible for Microsoft to create something similar? Sure it would take some time and money, but not nearly as much as Macro and his huge ago wants you to believe!

PS. there are already some Instapaper clients for WP7.

Reply Score: 2

Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

Also, "good apps" are only and advantage to the platform owner if they are not available on competing platforms, and can't be ported (or cloned by someone else) with minor efforts.

I disagree. If there aren't enough good apps for the platform you wouldn't want to buy a phone with it. So it doesn't matter if everybody has the good apps. It starts to matter when your platform doesn't have a good app.

Reply Score: 1

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

While it doesn't speak for quality, it DOES speak for momentum. It's undeniable that the Windows Phone marketplace has incredible momentum behind it.

Microsoft is pulling ALL the stops with regards to driving hard and fast adoption of the platform. Given that we've moved much closer to a unified platform in recent releases, this will have a catalyst effect over to Windows 8.

A *lot* of people I talk to within the developer community is doing porting work to Windows 8. I'm sure its the same story on a larger scale.

Windows Phone has over 20,000 developers. That's 20,000 able bodied souls who already know the key technologies needed to write Windows 8 apps.

If you take .NET and XAML as a whole, you get an even larger number of developers.

People continue to completely underestimate Microsoft's vast .NET army.

Reply Score: 2

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Microsoft is pulling ALL the stops with regards to driving hard and fast adoption of the platform.

They kept off WP7 drive for 6 months of this year already, because of Window8. That is not good for anyone.

People continue to completely underestimate Microsoft's vast .NET army.

Both Apple(lack of Objective-C devs) and Android(massive Java dev army) have proven that having a large army does not mean it will translate onto a new medium.

Reply Score: 4

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

They kept off WP7 drive for 6 months of this year already, because of Window8. That is not good for anyone.


Not exactly sure what you mean. Nokia+MS combined developer outreach efforts are unmatched in the industry.



Both Apple(lack of Objective-C devs) and Android(massive Java dev army) have proven that having a large army does not mean it will translate onto a new medium.


Apples to Oranges comparison.

iOS had true, organic growth because it was the only thing available for a long time. It was relatively uncontested before Android gained traction. So the ecosystem sprung up out of need.

The problem with Android is the developer experience is piss poor. The IDE is fucking shitty ass eclipse. The emulator until literally the other day was dog slow. The UI markup language is primitive, and then of course there's the fragmentation elephant in the room.

Those are real issues which hinder adoption. Developers have been doing WPF/Silverlight development on Windows for years before Windows Phone. It naturally translated. A lot of big names in Silverlight and WPF instantly pumped out supporting toolkits and articles and code.

WP7 was really seen as a ".NET nirvana" and a lot of .NET fanboys who I knew flocked to write apps for it.

Now, imagine the gold rush when Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 share the same underlying technology, but on a greater scope.

Windows 8 lets you use C# and XAML. C++ and XAML or Javascript and HTML5. That's a pretty broad market of devs who are hungry to write apps for the worlds most popular OS.

Reply Score: 1

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Not exactly sure what you mean. Nokia+MS combined developer outreach efforts are unmatched in the industry.

Consumer and operator adoption, not developer adoption. Nokia was trying to do most of it, but is failing due to the drop in relationships with operators.


No comment on the second part, mostly because it will become an unproductive inter-fanboy sputum.

Reply Score: 2

EvilMonkeySlayer Member since:
2010-04-08

I've developed on Android, I've very little in the way of complaints.

Eclipse is an IDE that can be used with Android development but it isn't the only choice, it was simply the first to support Android development. Google do provide ADT tools and vaguely suggest Eclipse.

As to "shitty ass" Eclipse, this is purely all your personal preference. I personally like Eclipse and dislike IntelliJ. (in other words, if you don't like Eclipse then use IntelliJ)

In what way is the UI markup primitive? I've developed UI's without problem.

There is lots of bluster in your posts but little in the way of actual statements of fact.

The simple fact is Windows Phone has been an abject failure and it will continue to be a failure. Just because MS are trying to crowbar their mobile stuff in with Windows 8 will not suddenly make Windows Phone popular with people.



In my personal opinion and from the opinion every person I know who I've asked who has used it, windows 8 is from a user perspective an absolute dud. It has a UX that is a convoluted mess for the desktop. As nice as C# is, that doesn't detract from the horrendous.. absolutely horrendous desktop user experience.

I suspect W8 is going to get the user reputation as the next Vista. It'll do well on sales as it'll be bundled with OEMs on desktops as usual with MS. But from a bought off the shelf perspective it'll probably end up being skipped until MS fix the UX issues in W9.

As to windows 8 on tablets.. we'll see, but honestly. All the developer momentum is on IOS and Androids side right now. Just because something has a similar development environment doesn't mean they'll all magically become windows mobile developers overnight or even show any interest.

Honestly, look at the market. When it comes to it, the market sustains a couple of major platforms but that's it. As lovely as WP7 is there is next to no user interest in buying into a new platform and losing all their apps. Android and IOS are at the "good enough" stage for users never mind the fact that MS lacks the critical Google services or good equivalents.

Oh, just something else I saw you post about Direct3D on Windows Phone; Do you honestly think that only having Direct3D instead of OpenGL is a plus?

You do realise that pretty much all games on Android and IOS use OpenGL or alternatively something which abstracts (like unity) right? MS are massively hobbling the platform.

Look at it from this perspective of a game dev: "Well, I can write my game using OpenGL which covers Android and IOS making me lots of money with about 90%+ of the market, should I completely rewrite all the 3d handling code for WP which has a couple of percent and isn't likely to break even in dev costs. No."

As nice as developing for WP7/8 is in general, it's a failed platform. MS missed the bus, they were too late to the game. It's interesting to see them spending so much money on it but it's going the way of webos. A lovely platform that had no real user interest.


As to my Android complaints, yep the emulator is slow but it's usable and honestly.. you do realise you can plug a phone into the pc and use that for development right?

My only other complaint is I wish it wasn't limited to Java 1.6 rather than 1.7. (hey, I like being able to switch case on a string)


You really need to take a step back and stop being so obsessed with being so blindly pro-MS. Most platforms are great to develop for, don't be so single minded.

Reply Score: 2

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I've developed on Android, I've very little in the way of complaints.

Eclipse is an IDE that can be used with Android development but it isn't the only choice, it was simply the first to support Android development. Google do provide ADT tools and vaguely suggest Eclipse.

As to "shitty ass" Eclipse, this is purely all your personal preference. I personally like Eclipse and dislike IntelliJ. (in other words, if you don't like Eclipse then use IntelliJ)


Java IDEs go from bad to worse. Worst being Eclipse and mildly better is IntelliJ. Netbeans, I won't even go there.

At work we ended up going with MonoDevelop and MonoDroid after finding it dramatically more usable than ANY Java IDE. Holy. Fuck.


In what way is the UI markup primitive? I've developed UI's without problem.


It is not a 1:1 mapping to UI elements like XAML is. There's a lot more plumbing work using Android Layout XML compared to XAML.

The Android code is a mess of findViewbyId(..) everywhere. Who the fuck wants to maintain that?

Every XAML element is a .NET object. Its really quite powerful when you come to think of it. The marriage of the two concepts is seamless.

You can with XAML: Do animation, styling, and layout. With Android you can just do layout.

Plus I'd rather kill myself before I have to use the Android visual designer again.

With XAML I have a world class tool in Expression Blend.


There is lots of bluster in your posts but little in the way of actual statements of fact.

The simple fact is Windows Phone has been an abject failure and it will continue to be a failure. Just because MS are trying to crowbar their mobile stuff in with Windows 8 will not suddenly make Windows Phone popular with people.


The original XBox was also a "failure". Microsoft has the resources to stay in the game until they eventually dominate the field.

Windows Phone emerging as additional viable ecosystem is an inevitability.

Denying that is just shortsighted foolishness.


As to windows 8 on tablets.. we'll see, but honestly. All the developer momentum is on IOS and Androids side right now. Just because something has a similar development environment doesn't mean they'll all magically become windows mobile developers overnight or even show any interest.


There is no developer momentum on Android tablets. None. Zero. You'd be hard pressed to find even a FEW good Android tablet apps. Trust me, I've tried.

Also, a good chunk of Silverlight and .NET devs DID become Windows Phone developers. That's part of the reason they had 20,000 developers OVER NIGHT. That's why app momentum is HIGHER than Android. We're adding apps at a faster rate despite having an install base astronomically smaller. Why is that?

Because there is genuine revenue coming out of the Windows Phone marketplace. The Android market is a complete and utter failure. No one really gets money off of it. Its just a means to an end, growing the user base.


Honestly, look at the market. When it comes to it, the market sustains a couple of major platforms but that's it. As lovely as WP7 is there is next to no user interest in buying into a new platform and losing all their apps. Android and IOS are at the "good enough" stage for users never mind the fact that MS lacks the critical Google services or good equivalents.


Palm was once good enough. Windows Mobile was once good enough. Times change.


Oh, just something else I saw you post about Direct3D on Windows Phone; Do you honestly think that only having Direct3D instead of OpenGL is a plus?


Yes, honestly.


You do realise that pretty much all games on Android and IOS use OpenGL or alternatively something which abstracts (like unity) right? MS are massively hobbling the platform.


You realize almost all games on Windows use DirectX, right? You realize a great majority of middleware on Windows uses DirectX, right?

Like I said in another comment, the DirectX and OpenGL war was decided a half a decade ago. Around the time Vista launched. OpenGL lost that war.

You realize the DOMINANT GRAPHICS PLATFORM is DirectX? Right? I mean, you _ARE_ aware of that? Correct?


Look at it from this perspective of a game dev: "Well, I can write my game using OpenGL which covers Android and IOS making me lots of money with about 90%+ of the market, should I completely rewrite all the 3d handling code for WP which has a couple of percent and isn't likely to break even in dev costs. No."


Alternatively, here's how it'll play out:

"Hey, the Unreal Engine works on Windows 8."
"Hey it also works on Windows Phone 8 now too"
"Hey it also works on the Xbox 360"

Plus "Hey all of our fucking devs know DirectX, because its all anyone bothers to learn"

Seriously.


As nice as developing for WP7/8 is in general, it's a failed platform. MS missed the bus, they were too late to the game. It's interesting to see them spending so much money on it but it's going the way of webos. A lovely platform that had no real user interest.


Microsoft is no Palm. Windows Phone is too crucial for them to give up. Like I said, the Xbox was a loss leader for a LONG time before it became the success it is today. Don't be so naive as to write off Windows Phone.



As to my Android complaints, yep the emulator is slow but it's usable and honestly.. you do realise you can plug a phone into the pc and use that for development right?


Yes I do, but your costs rise right with that need. Now every developer needs to have a phone on hand in order to even do some development.

You realize on Windows Phone you can make money without even owning a phone, right? I know plenty of devs who just do emulator development and it works great for them.

The Windows Phone emulator really has no equal. With Windows Phone 8 it will run on Hyper-V. Yeah, good luck matching that.


You really need to take a step back and stop being so obsessed with being so blindly pro-MS. Most platforms are great to develop for, don't be so single minded.


It is exactly the fact that I spent a few months working with Android that I can be so vehemently opposed to everything it stands for. As a developer it is borderline insulting they expect us to use this stuff.

Reply Score: 2

dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

You ignore the fact that there is (and will allays be) a significant performance/feature gap between powered and mobile devices.
The gap is expressed in disparity between DX 10 and before and that makes porting game engines from PC and consoles to phones more involving than just rewriting UI code between IOS and Android.

Reply Score: 2

EvilMonkeySlayer Member since:
2010-04-08

Urgh, I hate silly long quotathons.

Java IDE's: That's personal preference. The IDE has now reached a point where it's mostly just peoples personal preferences to which they prefer using. I'd compare it to MS Office, like ms office 2000 reached a good enough point of features people actually use most IDE's have now reached a point of good enough for features devs actually use.

I agree, MS tools are very cool. But Android dev is not hard nor is it some kind of sumerian ziggurat of findviewbyid's.

Erm, yes.. you can do animation in XML on android.

Who uses any visual designer? Everyone uses it to quickly see how it looks then goes back to the XML or the Java.

MS managed to get success with the Xbox 360 because Sony royally messed up with the PS3. And i'd remind you that Nintendo were the victor of this generation of consoles, not MS. Ultimately in terms of sales the 360 and PS3 are now worldwide about equal in parity. So i'd hardly describe that as "dominating the field".

You can call it what you like, the simple reality is that MS have lost the phone market. They might be able to buy themselves some market share but it's simply unsustainable, they can only spend so many billions before the shareholders begin questioning the reasoning. MS' primary phone provider is a dying company which just shed 10,000 jobs. (pretty sad, as Nokia were once real innovators)

As to the tablet market, right now the only successful tablet is made by Apple. From every single news source that has been mentioned the pricing of Windows tablets will be above the iPad, that's commercial suicide. I'm personally holding a wait and see approach about the next Android and Windows 8 tablets. I wouldn't be so closed minded as to outright dismiss something without trying it. (Android 4 on tablets is okay at the moment)

Because there is genuine revenue coming out of the Windows Phone marketplace. The Android market is a complete and utter failure. No one really gets money off of it. Its just a means to an end, growing the user base.


Really? A complete and utter failure? Do you really want to say that? That is just silly.
I don't doubt that there are a few small developers making money on WP7, but I seriously doubt there is anything on the same level as the money that's being made on IOS and Android. The numbers of users simply prevents that.

Yep, Android and IOS are good enough. And windows phone isn't good enough nor a game changer like the iPhone was. Times change every so often and Windows Phone isn't it.


Look at the type of games on games consoles and on the pc.

Now look at games on mobile phones and tablets, you can't simply go from console dev to mobile dev and expect the same sales or results with the same kind of games. You have to create games for the platform. Now again, if you're a dev creating games you will look at what mobile platforms have the biggest share and focus on them first. The dominant mobile platforms use OpenGL, that's the reality. The devs will go where the money is, which is OpenGL.

People simply aren't buying Windows Phone, therefore the devs won't write games for it because the initial investment is high with low probability of a return on your investment. Some games companies may be sources of evil, but they're run by businesses who will look at the numbers.

You can hark on all you like about DirectX, but the mobile devs are writing for OpenGL and it's not going to change anytime soon. It's the Angry Birds syndrome, the market isn't there therefore the devs won't write or port the games because the cost of porting is too great with little return. MS would be very smart to have an implementation of OpenGL in WP8 that way they'd get more cross platform games on it.

By the way, DirectX is the dominant platform on windows, the xbox 360 and windows mobile.

Everything else, whether it be the Wii (the dominant games console) or Android (the dominant mobile platform) it's OpenGL.

No serious devs are going to invest serious money into writing games for a single mobile platform that has a couple of percent of the market. Nobody.

And thank you for reiterating my point about middleware, Unreal like Unity will be one of the ways to get games cross platform on mobile. Side stepping the whole OpenGL/Direct3D malarky.

I'm not writing off Windows Phone, I'm saying it's lost unless MS do something truly radical like Apple did with the iPhone. Which right now i'm not seeing anything.

Good on the windows phone emulator! Good show!


Again, stop being so blindly pro-MS. It's really clouding your vision to the current realities. I'd quite like to see a three horse mobile race, but right now it's Android and IOS that are dominating. MS is going up against Google and Apple which haven't really slipped up much. MS are going against them with a platform that's okay at best and so-so at worst.

Reply Score: 2

cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

> Nokia+MS combined developer outreach efforts are unmatched in the industry.

As we see on there unmatched "success" in the industry...

Reply Score: 1

Sauron Member since:
2005-08-02

And those are metro apps. OK, a significant percentage are glorified RSS readers, but same goes for iOS. These Apple fanboys really need to get over themselves and their belief that "Everything is about Apple, nobody else need apply."


Yeah but, I don't want or need 99975K calculators, rss readers and weather apps thank you very much! ;)

Reply Score: 1

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Alas, no one cares about WP7 regardless of how many apps it has.

Reply Score: 2

Consumers
by TADS on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 18:39 UTC
TADS
Member since:
2010-11-01

As a side note, you gotta love the terminology in the article. Apparently there are no users anymore, just "consumers". Which always brings to mind a certain quote...

[A consumer is] something the size of a baby hippo, the color of a week-old boiled potato, that lives by itself, in the dark, in a double-wide on the outskirts of Topeka. It's covered with eyes and it sweats constantly. The sweat runs into those eyes and makes them sting. It has no mouth... no genitals, and can only express its mute extremes of murderous rage and infantile desire by changing the channels on a universal remote.
~William Gibson - "Idoru"

Reply Score: 3

MS Windows Platform hook
by acobar on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 19:20 UTC
acobar
Member since:
2005-11-15

MS development drive was since I remember pinned on:

- lock-in on OS pc shipments;
- Commercial ties with hardware companies - still strong;
- business applications that leverage the value of MS as a business platform, which is still great. Apple is far away on this;
- games - still unsurpassed. Consoles did shift a little the market but it is still basically a MS camp. Most games are still developed on MS platform;
- market opportunity for new professionals - undermined by surge on opportunities of the move to the web. It is actually almost platform agnostic now;
- regular software - also undermined by the surge of users not needing special applications other than what is web or multimedia related. i.e., they need basically browsers as a platform for their needs plus something to take care of photos, music and movies. This is the weakest point of MS as they dont have a good enough solution to counter iTunes (by the way, which a consider a monstrosity, but I am not the typical user anyway).

The shift to the web is the critical part for MS, as it devalued its before untouchable position as well as the huge number of people that just care about using computers/tablets/phones for communication and shopping purposes.

So, what MS can do? Use what they have strong to break in and improve their solution to take care of photos, music and videos. Make no mistakes, even thought Ballmer was/is not the right guy to lead MS, they will probably succeed. My guess is that BlackBerry is in a bad position right now.

Even if slowly in the beginning and, of course, not with the same drive that they had before, they will start to capture back market share. Sad, but true.

Edited 2012-06-23 19:37 UTC

Reply Score: 2

I really can't see the problem
by karunko on Sun 24th Jun 2012 09:19 UTC
karunko
Member since:
2008-10-28

A developer goes where the money is, but a very smart one goes where the money will be.

I mean, given the choice would you rather develop for an overcrowded App Store where your product will be just one of the hundred of thousands available, or try to be one of the first that made it to the New Frontier?

Yes, we all read stories about someone who made loads of money on the App Store, but let's keep in mind that these are the exception to the rule and most developers can't even recover the development costs (one of many examples: http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/brands/2010/06/full-analysis-...).

As for needing Windows versus needing OS X to write software, every Mac developer's machine is perfectly capable of running Windows, therefore the point is moot and more along the lines of "damn, I can't think of anything else to close this article."


RT.

Reply Score: 2

RE: I really can't see the problem
by dsmogor on Sun 24th Jun 2012 15:55 UTC in reply to "I really can't see the problem"
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

MS now has 100k apps for ~10M installed base.
Android has 300k apps for ~330M installed base.
Do the math.

Edited 2012-06-24 15:55 UTC

Reply Score: 1

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

That would be:
100k - ~20m(I really hope they achieved that at least)
470k - ~380m(300m + 119days*700k)
550k - ~420m(365m end of calendar Q1 + 55mil)

Reply Score: 2

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Customers on Android are less likely to purchase apps, and piracy is RAMPANT on the Android platform. Development costs are also higher.

Reply Score: 2

EvilMonkeySlayer Member since:
2010-04-08

How are development costs higher on Android? All the dev tools are free, the primary language is Java so you've got a large pool of existing libraries and developers to call upon.

That statement doesn't make sense.

All platforms have a problem with piracy, it's an age old problem that isn't going away any time soon.

Reply Score: 1

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Because:

A) The tooling is subpar leading to more developer frustration and lost productivity
B) The emulator (up until recently) was dog slow, again, leading to developer frustration and productivity.
C) Fragmentation. Needing to deal with compat toolkits and managing backporting of features. Dealing with an array of resolutions. All that leads to time spent dealing with bullshit that developers should not have to worry about.

It gets worse if you're a game developer. Deal with ARM SoCs which have GPUs which implement only _some_ vendor extensions, or implement them in bugged out ways (Tegra I'm looking at you. Fuck.)

All this leads to lower productivity and higher costs. Then factor in the fact that app piracy is RAMPANT, not just existent, but utterly rampant on Android..and it starts to not make sense.

The final nail in the coffin is the propensity of users to actually even fucking buy an app once you spend money creating it. The Android market is a race to the bottom, wild west, shit hole of a marketplace. No real developer makes money there.

The real cash is over at iOS, everyone knows that.

Reply Score: 2

EvilMonkeySlayer Member since:
2010-04-08

Because:

A) The tooling is subpar leading to more developer frustration and lost productivity


Huh? Eclipse and IntelliJ are both fine IDE's. There is shed loads of documentation. How is it subpar?


B) The emulator (up until recently) was dog slow, again, leading to developer frustration and productivity.


Are you honestly saying a developer writing an Android app does not have access to an Android device on which to write?
I've been mildly annoyed when using the emulator, but honestly.. who uses that when you've got an actual device?



C) Fragmentation. Needing to deal with compat toolkits and managing backporting of features. Dealing with an array of resolutions. All that leads to time spent dealing with bullshit that developers should not have to worry about.


Um, it's pretty trivial to add compat toolkits if you want newer features in older android versions. (stuff like Action Bar Sherlock is trivially easy to add and manage)

Handling multiple resolutions is not hard in the least unless you're hard coding to pixel rather than density. Which is a really stupid thing to do, people like different screen sizes and resolutions.



It gets worse if you're a game developer. Deal with ARM SoCs which have GPUs which implement only _some_ vendor extensions, or implement them in bugged out ways (Tegra I'm looking at you. Fuck.)


Then you code to the lowest common denominator and deal with it or you code your way around it, any large platform that has multiple vendors has this problem. Android has it, Windows has it. I'm not really seeing your point here.



All this leads to lower productivity and higher costs. Then factor in the fact that app piracy is RAMPANT, not just existent, but utterly rampant on Android..and it starts to not make sense.


Again, all platforms have piracy. Looking on a certain bay of pirates both IOS and Android apps have the same levels of downloads. So I'm unsure where you're getting your "OMFG RAMPANT" from. Unless you're saying the two most popular mobile platforms have piracy, just like all popular platforms have a problem with piracy?


The final nail in the coffin is the propensity of users to actually even fucking buy an app once you spend money creating it. The Android market is a race to the bottom, wild west, shit hole of a marketplace. No real developer makes money there.

The real cash is over at iOS, everyone knows that.


Honestly dude, citation needed. IOS does make more money on a per user basis, Apple have been very smart in monetising. But looking on Google Play simply proves you wrong, the sheer quality and quantity of apps on there proves you wrong about nobody making money. You need only look at the numbers. Both Android and IOS make app developers money, the sheer size of the user base makes your point invalid. The idea that out of hundreds of millions of users nobody is buying apps or downloading apps with ads in them is just silly.

Reply Score: 1

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I take a plain text editor over Eclipse anyday, Eclipse is barely any better than VS 2003. There is simply no equal to Visual Studio 2010.

Reply Score: 2

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Starting a flamewar? Seriously, you have an issue with Android.

And by some comments, it seems you don't even develop professionally for it. My "distaste" for most stuff Microsoft has at least some history behind it.

PS: Piracy is one of the major reasons why Microsoft is dominating the desktop PC market.

Reply Score: 2

Dig his style...
by thenewfeats on Sun 24th Jun 2012 09:39 UTC
thenewfeats
Member since:
2012-06-24

Metro so K-Rad.

Reply Score: 1

How to attract developers.
by spiderman on Sun 24th Jun 2012 10:21 UTC
spiderman
Member since:
2008-10-23

Make your platform libre.

Look at GNU:
* Zero market share.
* Zero profitability.
* Millions of developers.

Now if you have a platform like Windows 8 with 90% market share and high profitability and you make it libre, developers will come in such an unprecedented huge number that we will hardly notice other platforms even exist.

Reply Score: 0

mobile app devs
by l3v1 on Sun 24th Jun 2012 16:53 UTC
l3v1
Member since:
2005-07-06

I'd say the problem tackled in the original post is a real one for app devs who make their living from mobile apps. Fortunately, I'm not one of them ;) I mostly create mobile apps for research purposes (to see how certian algorithms perform on mobile devices) and for that I really like to use a platform for which I can create apps in omni-available IDEs and the native algorithms even from a console with ssh - yeah, it's no secret I prefer Android. For the MS problem above, yes, it could be a problem to attract good devs to the Metro environment and the WP8 platform, a problem which will solve itself if and only when windows phones and tablets manage to gather a serious market share, since if that occurs, no app dev will be able to ignore tha platform. Otherwise it will be good bye and thanks for all the fish.

Edited 2012-06-24 16:54 UTC

Reply Score: 2

smkudelko
Member since:
2012-04-03

It's true that the apps bundled with Windows 8 suck. In fact, ever since Windows 7's optional "install Windows Live Essentials instead" decision was I unhappy with the first-party apps on Microsoft Windows.

Outlook Express has long been horrible, but I had a ton of clients that used it, and even used it myself back when I had a POP e-mail account from my ISP. Then, when I first upgraded to Mac OS X back in 2004, I saw Apple's Mail.app and loved it and wondered why Microsoft couldn't create something similar… something that wasn't as overkill as Outlook, but not as limited and shitty as Outlook Express (seriously.. the inability to import/export your mailboxes after how many versions was just ridiculous).

Ironically, for all of Windows Vista's flaws, the built-in Windows Mail application was beautiful. The interface was lean, it properly handled IMAP folders, and you could import/export. In fact, I set up an IMAP e-mail account on my web server just so I could use it. I loved it. Then, with Windows 7, they took it away and forced users to use that god awful Windows Live Mail mess (which was confusing to a lot of my clients because they also renamed "Hotmail" to "Windows Live Hotmail" so many clients didn't understand what they were using).

I think the Windows Live Essentials apps, with their horribly bloated and excessive "chrome" or window borders or whatever you call it, was the pre-cursor to Metro. A ton of wasted space that made the app look like their horribly designed web apps. Metro is the next logical step.

Microsoft has hidden behind the excuse "we're not showing all of the UI changes in Windows 8 yet" and "we're going to add more functionality… we promise" but the fact that after 3 public preview releases you can't add POP and IMAP accounts to the Metro Mail application is inexcusable. And the functionality of the app is pathetic. My old BlackBerry running OS 5 has more capability than that Metro-based Mail client (the BlackBerry not using an e-mail account that is connected to Exchange or BIS/BES… so, just plain old e-mail, which BlackBerry doesn't handle well at all).

Microsoft's first-party apps have been poor for quite some time. Windows Media Player has gotten more bloated. I know a lot of people claim otherwise, but the Zune software is absolutely horrible, bloated, and awkward to use in my opinion. Windows Movie Maker was a nice answer to iMovie back in Windows Me/XP but has gotten worse. Outlook Express finally shaped up into a decent client with Windows Mail in Vista only to be replaced by the most awful Windows Live Mail, and they have yet to offer a decent built-in solution for standards-based e-mail (POP/IMAP), calendars (CalDAV), and contacts (CardDAV).

Metro isn't going to be any better. Instead, we're going to see a bunch of "apps" for individual services and a bunch of free or cheap e-mail/calendar/contacts clients that differ very little and will work with standards and clog up the "Windows Marketplace." And to get the most out of Metro, each individual app/client will get its own "SUPER AWESOME LIVE TILES FTW!!!!!!" clogging up the already stupid and wasteful Start screen.

When Internet Explorer is the best first-party built-in app on Windows, things are pretty bad.

Reply Score: 2